Daubert in the Law Office: Routinizing Procedural Change

44 Pages Posted: 1 Oct 2006


The U.S. Supreme Court's pronouncements on the standards that should govern the admission of scientific and other expert testimony, what is commonly referred to as the Daubert Trilogy, has produced substantial legal commentary and a growing body of empirical research. Most of that research focuses on decisions by courts on Daubert challenges; while there is some speculative discussions on the broader impact of Daubert, there is minimal empirical research assessing the impact of Daubert more broadly on the litigation process. Drawing on a combination of observation in a law firm and a series of interviews with practitioners, this paper describes the process of decision making about Daubert related issues. The conclusion drawn from the analysis is that Daubert has become a routinized aspect of the litigation process in a range of cases, few of which deal with the kind of controversial or innovative science at the heart of the original Daubert case.

Keywords: litigation, expert testimony, scientific testimony, evidence

Suggested Citation

Kritzer, Herbert M., Daubert in the Law Office: Routinizing Procedural Change. Univ. of Wisconsin Legal Studies Research Paper No. 1043, William Mitchell Legal Studies Research Paper No. 72, Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, Forthcoming, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=933668

Herbert M. Kritzer (Contact Author)

University of Minnesota Law School ( email )

229 19th Avenue South
Minneapolis, MN 55455
United States

Do you want regular updates from SSRN on Twitter?

Paper statistics

Abstract Views
PlumX Metrics