| Abstrakt: |
The article looks at the impact of the rulings in the Daubert versus Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc. case and the Kumho Tire Co. versus Carmichael case on expert witnessing. It says that the 1993 decision of the Supreme Court in the Daubert case has changed the rules in connection with what is acceptable scientific explanation by an expert witness. Prior to the Daubert decision, judges must decide on two things including whether or not the findings presented by experts were generally accepted within the field to which they belonged. As of 2000, there are about 212 cases in federal courts that have cited Daubert in criminal, contract, tort and other categories of cases. |
