Expert Evidence after Daubert

Posted: 18 Oct 2010

See all articles by Michael J. Saks

Michael J. Saks

Arizona State University (ASU) - Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law

David L. Faigman

University of California Hastings College of the Law

Date Written: December 2005

Abstract

Daubert stands for a trilogy of Supreme Court cases as well as revisions of the Federal Rules of Evidence. Together they represent American law's most recent effort to filter expert evidence offered at trial. This review begins by placing the Daubert trilogy in the context of earlier judicial efforts to solve the screening problem, which began well before the twentieth century, and then provides a brief explication of evidence law under Daubert. Next, we discuss several aspects of the jurisprudence of expert evidence: its connection to debates in the philosophy of science, the practical legal problems courts are trying to solve, and procedural implications. Then we review and discuss varied impacts of Daubert: changes in law, marked increases in cases and scholarship relating to expert evidence, and research examining judicial gatekeeping under Daubert (civil defendants appear to benefit greatly and criminal defendants hardly at all). We conclude by offering several predictions and prescriptions for the future of expert evidence.

Suggested Citation

Saks, Michael J. and Faigman, David L., Expert Evidence after Daubert (December 2005). Annual Review of Law and Social Science (2005), Vol. 1, pp. 105-130, 2005. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1693349 or http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.lawsocsci.1.041604.115907

Michael J. Saks (Contact Author)

Arizona State University (ASU) - Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law ( email )

Box 877906
Tempe, AZ 85287-7906
United States

David L. Faigman

University of California Hastings College of the Law ( email )

200 McAllister Street
San Francisco, CA 94102
United States

Register to save articles to
your library

Register

Paper statistics

Abstract Views
459
PlumX Metrics