Sunday, September 05, 2004

New Alabama Decisions

Having been detained, as we occasionally are, by the actual practice of law, we have fallen somewhat behind in posting on recent appellate decisions made known to us by our state law correspondents. We will try to catch up alphabetically. Courtesy of Edward Still, our page on Alabama decisions now boasts summaries from two new cases. In Minor v. State, No. CR-00-1300 (Ala. Crim. App. Aug. 27, 2004), the Court of Criminal Appeals held that testimony from a physician in a criminal proceeding need not be tested under Daubert or Frye. And in Vesta Fire Ins. Co. v. Milam & Co. Constr., Inc., No. 1021196 (Ala. Aug. 27, 2004), the Alabama Supreme Court refused an invitation to adopt Daubert for the second time in one month.

That still leaves news to report from Illinois, Kentucky, Michigan, and Texas. Stay tuned.

posted by pn at 2:13 AM  

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home

Fed. R. Evid. 702: If scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue, a witness qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education, may testify thereto in the form of an opinion or otherwise, if (1) the testimony is based upon sufficient facts or data, (2) the testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods, and (3) the witness has applied the principles and methods reliably to the facts of the case.