Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Expert Witnesses: Observing the Limits of Expertise
In 2013, Timothy M. Tippins, a member of this newsletter's Board of Editors, opined, in a New York Law Journal column, that there was an “urgent need for the legal system to impose mandatory and enforceable standards of performance upon those mental health professionals who offer potentially life-altering opinions in the custody court” (The Bar Won't Raise Itself: The Case for Evaluation Standards, July 8, 2013). A year later, writing again for the same ALM publication, Tippins opined that “[a]ll involved must be accountable, and accountability requires standards of performance” (Custody Evaluations: The Quest for Quality, July 3, 2014). Though these articles addressed the work of custody evaluators, life-altering opinions are also being offered by file reviewers (work product reviewers), some of whom seem to be oblivious to, or unconcerned about, the inherent limitations of a file reviewer's data.
In the relatively short period of time between 1993 and 1999, The Supreme Court of the United States addressed the issue of expert testimony in three cases. In Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993), the proffered (and rejected) expert opinion was that Bendectin, prescribed for the management of nausea and vomiting in pregnancy, was teratogenic. In General Electric Co. v. Joiner, 522 U.S. 136 (1997), alleged workplace exposure to carcinogens was at issue, and, here too, proffered expert testimony was ruled inadmissible. Kumho Tire v. Carmichael, 526 U.S. 137 (1999), was a product liability case, and the product analysis conducted by the plaintiff's expert was deemed to be unreliable.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- 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 a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Law Firms are Reducing Redundant Real Estate by Bringing Support Services Back to the Office
A trend analysis of the benefits and challenges of bringing back administrative, word processing and billing services to law offices.
Bankruptcy Sales: Finding a Diamond In the Rough
There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.
Bit Parts
Summary Judgment Denied Defendant in Declaratory Action by Producer of To Kill a Mockingbird Broadway Play Seeking Amateur Theatrical Rights
Risks of “Baseball Arbitration” in Resolving Real Estate Disputes
“Baseball arbitration” refers to the process used in Major League Baseball in which if an eligible player's representative and the club ownership cannot reach a compensation agreement through negotiation, each party enters a final submission and during a formal hearing each side — player and management — presents its case and then the designated panel of arbitrators chooses one of the salary bids with no other result being allowed. This method has become increasingly popular even beyond the sport of baseball.
Disconnect Between In-House and Outside Counsel
'Disconnect Between In-House and Outside Counsel is a continuation of the discussion of client expectations and the disconnect that often occurs. And although the outside attorneys should be pursuing how inside-counsel actually think, inside counsel should make an effort to impart this information without waiting to be asked.