Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
509 U.S. 579 (1993) Cited 26,294 times 225 Legal AnalysesHolding that a trial judge must ensure that all admitted expert testimony "is not only relevant, but reliable"
U.S. v. Frazier
387 F.3d 1244 (11th Cir. 2004) Cited 1,485 times 3 Legal AnalysesHolding that, under the abuse-of-discretion standard, "we must affirm unless . . . the district court has made a clear error of judgment, or has applied the wrong legal standard"
Hendrix v. Evenflo Co.
609 F.3d 1183 (11th Cir. 2010) Cited 256 times 3 Legal AnalysesHolding that because the expert failed to reliably rule in his theory of causation, the court did not need to "venture into the quagmire of attempting to define the parameters of a reliable process of 'ruling out' other possible causes" of the disease in question
Chapman v. Procter & Gamble Distributing, LLC
766 F.3d 1296 (11th Cir. 2014) Cited 161 times 2 Legal AnalysesHolding that a failure to consider idiopathic causes rendered the differential diagnosis unreliable
Seamon v. Remington Arms Co.
813 F.3d 983 (11th Cir. 2016) Cited 89 timesIn Seamon, the Eleventh Circuit reversed the district court's exclusion of a plaintiff's expert as unreliable, finding that it was “evident from the record that [the expert] did in fact provide a reasonable explanation as to why he has concluded that any alternative cause suggested by the defense was not the sole cause of the plaintiff's injury.” 813 F.3d at 989.
Adams v. Lab. Corp. of Am.
760 F.3d 1322 (11th Cir. 2014) Cited 73 timesHolding that it was manifestly erroneous for the district court to exclude an expert on the basis that her opinion was “an ipse dixit assessment,” when the record was to the contrary
Rule 702 - Testimony by Expert Witnesses
Fed. R. Evid. 702 Cited 26,670 times 255 Legal AnalysesAdopting the Daubert standard