Daubert Watch

Dauberttacker.com reported on an interesting Daubert challenge involving the expert witness fees of a expert who had been 'Dauberted' out of the case. In this case, the defendant who apparently was successful on their defense of the claims, attempted to get the court to award expert witness fees for the services of their banking expert. (click here for the complaint and jury verdict)

The court stated:

To require a party to pay for the costs of a witness who was not even called, and against whom the court had sustained a Daubert challenge was manifestly unjust. No fees were awarded as to [The Plaintiff].

Furthermore the court stated, in this banking case, 'the court declined to award defendant expert witness fees for the services of their expert...At the Daubert hearing on June 1, 2005, the court had stated that his testimony did not meet the reliability factors for expert testimony listed in Fed. R. Evid. 702, and discussed in Kumho. The court also stated that, absent the provision of some additional authority by defendant Penland, [Plaintiff]'s testimony would go beyond courts ruling on the limitations of the inpari delicto defense. '