Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=2295003
 


 



The Stricter Standard: An Empirical Assessment of Daubert's Effect on Civil Defendants


Andrew W. Jurs


Drake University Law School

Scott DeVito


Florida Coastal School of Law

July 17, 2013

Catholic University Law Review, Vol. 62, 2013

Abstract:     
While Daubert was clear in its rejection of Frye and the substantive standard for expert admissibility, its effect on litigants has been hotly debated. Several studies since 1993 used quantitative analysis through case study analysis and judicial surveys, to measure Daubert’s effect. Yet these methodologies have reached contradictory results. In 2005, Edward Cheng and Albert Yoon offered a revolutionary new approach in their work Does Frye or Daubert Matter? A Study of Scientific Admissibility Standards. They proposed that studying removal of cases from State Court to Federal Court in the period 1990 to 2000 could quantitatively demonstrate Daubert’s true effect. It works because a litigant could, by removing a case to federal court, switch scientific admissibility standards in some circumstances. The aggregate change in behavior of all litigants can therefore be measured.

We agree that removal rate offers the best hope for assessing the true effect of Daubert, and so in this study we offer our analysis of removal rates using econometric tools never before applied in this area. Our analysis reveals a startling discovery: Daubert is the stricter standard for expert admissibility. Not only does a change removal rate after Daubert clearly demonstrate this result, but it is confirmed through a “shift back” to state courts when the state also adopts Daubert and removal no longer entails a change in standards. Our results directly contrast with Cheng & Yoon’s conclusions, and so we also revisit their study and deconstruct its methodology piece-by-piece. In so doing, we will describe several errors in that study both explaining the different results but also ultimately undermining its validity.

Ultimately, our research into aggregate case data from real cases demonstrates a new and conclusive finding: Daubert has been the stricter standard.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 58

Keywords: Daubert, expert evidence, admissibility, gatekeeping, science and the law, experts, empirical

Accepted Paper Series


Download This Paper

Date posted: July 19, 2013  

Suggested Citation

Jurs, Andrew W. and DeVito, Scott, The Stricter Standard: An Empirical Assessment of Daubert's Effect on Civil Defendants (July 17, 2013). Catholic University Law Review, Vol. 62, 2013. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2295003

Contact Information

Andrew W. Jurs (Contact Author)
Drake University Law School ( email )
27th & Carpenter Sts.
Des Moines, IA 50311
United States
515-271-2824 (Phone)
Scott DeVito
Florida Coastal School of Law ( email )
8787 Baypine Rd.
Jacksonville, FL 32256
United States
(904) 680-7741 (Phone)
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 207
Downloads: 68
Download Rank: 192,483

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo2 in 0.390 seconds