Account

Sign in to access your account and subscription

Evaluating the Experts

The U.S. Supreme Court, in its landmark <i>Daubert</i> decision (<i>Daubert v. Merrill Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.</i>, 509 U.S. 579 (1993)), established an empirical standard of evidentiary reliability to ensure that only those expert opinions predicated upon demonstrably valid knowledge would make their way into evidence. Daubert further instructed that when the expert testimony comes from a discipline that purports to be scientific, as does psychology, evidentiary reliability translates to a standard of scientific validity. This article examines the peer-review/publication process and explores its value and its limitations as a measure of evidentiary reliability.

20 minute read May 30, 2006 at 12:02 PM
By
ALM Staff and Law Journal Newsletters
Evaluating the Experts

The U.S. Supreme Court, in its landmark Daubert decision (Daubert v. Merrill Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993)), established an empirical standard of evidentiary reliability to ensure that only those expert opinions predicated upon demonstrably valid knowledge would make their way into evidence.

This premium content is locked for LawJournalNewsletters subscribers only

ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN LawJournalNewsletters

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

Already have an account? Sign In Now

For enterprise-wide or corporate access, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or call 1-877-256-2473.

NOT FOR REPRINT

© 2026 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.

Continue Reading

The combination of increasing operating costs and uncertain government reimbursement funding continues to place health care providers under financial pressure, and in many cases, financial distress. Given the importance of Medicare/Medicaid funding of claims under provider agreements with the federal government, how courts interpret and apply the interplay between the Bankruptcy Code and Medicare Program Act determines the disposition of hundreds of millions of dollars of claims for reimbursement that support the health care system.

April 30, 2026

As AI becomes embedded in everyday business and legal operations, organizations are confronting a new expectation: simply disclosing AI use is no longer enough. A critical shift is taking place in the legal industry: transparency is no longer just about disclosure; it’s about comprehension.

April 30, 2026