Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
509 U.S. 579 (1993) Cited 26,224 times 224 Legal AnalysesHolding that a trial judge must ensure that all admitted expert testimony "is not only relevant, but reliable"
Yeti by Molly Ltd. v. Deckers Outdoor Corp.
259 F.3d 1101 (9th Cir. 2001) Cited 1,324 timesHolding that the burden to show substantial justification or harmlessness is on the party who made the late disclosure
Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
43 F.3d 1311 (9th Cir. 1995) Cited 1,276 times 4 Legal AnalysesHolding that expert testimony was inadmissible based on its unreliable methodology notwithstanding "the impressive qualifications of plaintiffs' experts"
Goodman v. Staples the Office Super-Store, LLC
644 F.3d 817 (9th Cir. 2011) Cited 513 times 2 Legal AnalysesHolding that treating physicians were retained experts where they formed their opinions after treatment for purposes of litigation, and their opinions were outside the scope of the treatment they rendered
R.C. Olmstead, Inc. v. CU Interface, LLC
606 F.3d 262 (6th Cir. 2010) Cited 230 times 1 Legal AnalysesHolding that the defendant could not have "misappropriated" the plaintiff's trade secret by obtaining it from a third party because that third party "was under no contractual duty" to maintain the secrecy of the plaintiff's information
Ortiz-Lopez v. Sociedad Espanola de Auxilio Mutuo Y Beneficiencia de Puerto Rico
248 F.3d 29 (1st Cir. 2001) Cited 176 timesHolding that district courts have broad discretion in meting out Rule 37(c) sanctions for Rule 26 violations
Iacangelo v. Georgetown University
272 F.R.D. 233 (D.D.C. 2011) Cited 15 timesAndrew E. Greenwald, Joseph, Greenwald & Laake, P.A., Greenbelt, MD, Anthony Girardy Newman, Newman & McIntosh LLC, Washington, DC, Ernest Wendell McIntosh, Jr., Newman & McIntosh, LLC, Bethesda, MD, for Plaintiffs. David C. Kiernan, Chen-Sen Wu, Michael V. Pinkel, Paul Thomas Hourihan, Williams & Connolly, LLP, George R. Clark, Washington, DC, John E. Hall, Jr., Hall Booth Smith & Slover P.C., Atlanta, GA, for Defendants. MEMORANDUM OPINION PAUL L. FRIEDMAN, District Judge. This matter is before
Morin v. U.S.
244 F. App'x 142 (9th Cir. 2007) Cited 12 timesIn Morin, the Ninth Circuit found that the district court had not abused its discretion by disqualifying the testimony of an expert witness where the witness had not shown "whether or how he applied differential diagnosis in determining the cause of Morin's plasmacytoma."
Deguzman v. United States
No. 2:12-cv-0338 KJM AC (E.D. Cal. Jun. 19, 2013) Cited 5 timesTreating physician "may testify as both a fact and expert witness"
Hawkins v. Graceland
210 F.R.D. 210 (W.D. Tenn. 2002) Cited 14 timesOn defendant's motion to exclude testimony of plaintiff's treating physician, the District Court, Breen, United States Magistrate Judge, held that: (1) even assuming that plaintiff's treating physician was an expert witness disclosure of whose identity was required under discovery rule, plaintiff's failure to so was harmless, and (2) fact that plaintiff's treating physician would testify as to the causation of plaintiff's injuries did not render physician an expert subject to written disclosure requirements
Rule 26 - Duty to Disclose; General Provisions Governing Discovery
Fed. R. Civ. P. 26 Cited 94,500 times 650 Legal AnalysesAdopting Fed.R.Civ.P. 37
Rule 37 - Failure to Make Disclosures or to Cooperate in Discovery; Sanctions
Fed. R. Civ. P. 37 Cited 45,716 times 318 Legal AnalysesHolding that a party may be barred from using a witness if it fails to disclose the witness
Rule 702 - Testimony by Expert Witnesses
Fed. R. Evid. 702 Cited 26,576 times 251 Legal AnalysesAdopting the Daubert standard
Rule 403 - Excluding Relevant Evidence for Prejudice, Confusion, Waste of Time, or Other Reasons
Fed. R. Evid. 403 Cited 22,456 times 81 Legal AnalysesAdopting a similar standard, but requiring the probative value to be "substantially outweighed" by these risks