Date of this Version
Court Review, Volume 51, Issue 1 (2015)
This issue provides two articles and a book review dealing with expert witnesses and their interactions with courts and judges.
Our lead article, from Professor Andrew Jurs, reviews the results of surveys he conducted with judges in six states. Jurs wanted to compare how judges handled expert-witness issues in states using the traditional admissibility test of Frye v. United States, 293 F. 1013 (D.C. Cir. 1923) (adopting the general-acceptance standard), and in states using the factor test announced in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993). As judges, we often are unaware of whether we are in the mainstream among judges or are outliers. If you sometimes decide whether an expert’s testimony is admissible under the standards applicable in your jurisdiction, we think you’ll find of interest how judges are applying both the Frye and Daubert standards today.