Daubert article in Michigan Bar journal
"Gatekeeping after Gilbert" by Brian Benner and Ronald Carlson, March 2006 issue of Michigan Bar Journal.
This article discusses Gilbert v Daimler Chrysler Corp. (470 Mich749; 685 NW2d 391 (2004)) and Michigan Rules of Evidence 702 and 703.
In Gilbert, the Michigan Supreme Court imposed gatekeeping responsibility on trial courts. Specifically it directed that an expert be limited to testifying in his of her area of expertise and not drift into other areas. The case involved a social worker who examined the plaintiff's hospital records and testified about the medical prognosis. The Court held "The medical 'prognosis of a social worker who has no training in medicine and lacks any demonstrated ability to interpret medical records meaningfully is of little assistance to the trier of fact."
The dictum of the Supremes is enbodied in Michigan Rules of Evidence 702 and MRE 703. MRE 702 tracks the Federal Rules of Evidence 702 and both are informed by Daubert v Merrell Dow.
MRE 703 however differs from FRE 703. In federal court an expert can rely on out of court documents but in Michigan the expert must base opinions on facts or data that are admitted in evidence at trial.
The authors of the article raise issues concerning written hearsay evidence like supporting reports that many economists use like the 'Dollar Value of a Day' and others.
This article discusses Gilbert v Daimler Chrysler Corp. (470 Mich749; 685 NW2d 391 (2004)) and Michigan Rules of Evidence 702 and 703.
In Gilbert, the Michigan Supreme Court imposed gatekeeping responsibility on trial courts. Specifically it directed that an expert be limited to testifying in his of her area of expertise and not drift into other areas. The case involved a social worker who examined the plaintiff's hospital records and testified about the medical prognosis. The Court held "The medical 'prognosis of a social worker who has no training in medicine and lacks any demonstrated ability to interpret medical records meaningfully is of little assistance to the trier of fact."
The dictum of the Supremes is enbodied in Michigan Rules of Evidence 702 and MRE 703. MRE 702 tracks the Federal Rules of Evidence 702 and both are informed by Daubert v Merrell Dow.
MRE 703 however differs from FRE 703. In federal court an expert can rely on out of court documents but in Michigan the expert must base opinions on facts or data that are admitted in evidence at trial.
The authors of the article raise issues concerning written hearsay evidence like supporting reports that many economists use like the 'Dollar Value of a Day' and others.
Labels: Daubert
posted by The Experts @ 9:58 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home