Federal Evidence Rule 702 on Expert Testimony

Home Page Legal Forms Business Ethics Training
Federal Rule 702

This section you are viewing includes these additional pages

Disclaimer: Information contained in pages and articles on this site provide general information and are not intended to provide legal advice on any specific legal matter or factual situation. This information is not intended to create or provide a lawyer-client relationship. It is not legal advice. Readers should not act upon this information without seeking professional counsel. Read full Disclaimers and Legal Notices.

Rule 702 of the Federal Rules of Evidence now incorporates the Daubert / Kumho / Joiner requirements.

Rule 702 now provides:

[A] witness qualified as an expert . . . may testify . . . in the form of an opinion or otherwise if

	(1) the testimony is based upon sufficient facts or data,
	(2) the testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods, and
	(3) the witness has applied the principles and methods reliably to the facts of the case.

The Committee, after clarifying that expert testimony may arise in scientific and non-scientific areas, see Kumho, 119 S. Ct. at 1178, sought to provide general standards that the trial court must use to assess the reliability and helpfulness of proffered expert testimony. The Committee, to explain the "reliability" requirements, added the three subparts at the end of the rule: (a) sufficient data, (b) reliable principles and methodology, and (c) reliable application of the methodology.

Rule 703 provides: The facts or data in the particular case upon which an expert bases an opinion or inference may be those perceived by or made known to the expert at or before the hearing. If of a type reasonably relied upon by experts in the particular field in forming opinion or inferences upon the subject, the facts or data need not be admissible in evidence in order for the opinion or inference to be admitted. Facts or data that are otherwise inadmissible shall not be disclosed to the jury by the proponent of the opinion or inference unless the court determines that their probative value in assisting the jury to evaluate the expert's opinion substantially outweighs their prejudicial effect.

Revised Rule 702 now requires than an opinion from an expert who is not a scientist should receive the same degree of scrutiny for reliability as an opinion from an expert who purports to be a scientist. To assist courts and litigants, the Federal Rules Committee identified five other inquiries (derived from court decisions) to be considered in performing the gate keeping function:

	(1) whether the testimony concerns matters growing naturally and directly out of research the expert has conducted independent of the litigation;
	(2) whether the expert has unjustifiably extrapolated from an accepted premise to an unfounded conclusion;
	(3) whether the expert has adequately accounted for obvious alternative explanations;
	(4) whether the expert is being as careful as he would be in his regular professional work outside his paid litigation consulting; and
	(5) whether the field of expertise claimed by the expert is known to reach reliable results for the type of opinion the expert would give.

Continue to Rule 702 Disclosure

Continue to Daubert Tips and Tactics

Using this site means you accept its terms. The information contained in this web site is not legal advice; it is for educational purposes only. Use of this site does not create an attorney/client relationship, even if you provide information to this web site, whether by e-mail or a contact form on this site.

© Copyright Leonard H. Bucklin 2000 to 01/30/2008 © All rights reserved. No copying or distribution of this material may be made without the express written consent of the copyright holder. For more information - see the Legal Notices.