Admissibility of Expert Opinion Testimony: S.B. 1189 (2010)
Adopted the Daubert standard for admitting expert witness testimony and
Adopted the Daubert standard for admitting expert witness testimony and expert evidence; Arizona Courts currently embrace the less stringent Frye standard. The Daubert standard requires the courts to consider four factors when examining the merits of expert testimony: (1) whether the expert’s technique or theory can be tested; (2) whether the theory has been subject to peer review and publication; (3) the known or potential rate of error of the technique or theory; and (4) whether the theory or technique has been generally accepted in the relevant field. This standard substantially decreases the probability of “junk science” being presented to juries, thus, affecting the outcome of a trial. It also serves as a filter that screens out ungrounded lawsuits from even reaching trial, which is especially important for manufacturers facing questionable product liability claims and health care providers facing questionable medical malpractice claims.
Latest News
View all news
Louisiana’s “Judicial Hellhole®” Status Costs Residents $965 Annually In “Tort Tax”
Nuclear Verdicts® and Insurance Fraud Plague State’s Legal System
King County Courts Named ‘Judicial Hellhole®’ for First Time
New Report Ranks Seattle-Area Courts Among Worst in US
Michigan’s Legal Climate Kills 97,000 Jobs Annually, New Report Reveals
$1,046/Person ‘Tort Tax’ — Court Expands Liability, Michiganders Pay
Show Me Your Lawsuit: St. Louis Ranks 7th in ‘Judicial Hellholes®’ Report
Courts Threaten Preemie Formula Access, Residents Pay $1,475/Person/Year ‘Tort Tax’
Cook County’s $21.3 Billion Problem: Lawsuit Abuse
Report Ranks County 6th Worst ‘Judicial Hellhole®’
California’s Judicial Hellhole® Status: Where Innovation Meets Litigation
Lawsuit Abuse Costs Every Californian $2,300 Annually, Kills 825,000 Jobs