Sunday, May 28, 2006

The Year So Far

Some updated numbers:

  • Federal appellate opinions so far in 2006 addressing the admissibility of expert evidence under Rule 702: 42
  • Projected opinions to be rendered this year at that pace: 104
  • Average per annum from 2000 through 2005: 132
  • Decisions this year in which a district court's evidentiary ruling was held to be error: 2
  • Decisions in which an erroneous district court ruling led to reversal of the judgment: 0
  • Number of dissents in this year's opinions to date: 0
  • Number of this year's opinions published to date: 17
  • Percentage published, year to date: 40.5
  • Percentage published, 1/1/2000 to date: 59.0
Update 5/28/06: We've added "under Rule 702" in the first bullet point, and the same reservation applies to the other bullet points. The caveat is necessary to distinguish decisions under other procedural and evidentiary rules that may also apply to expert testimony, such as Fed. R. Evid. 601. See, e.g., Jerden v. Amstutz, No. 04-35889 (9th Cir. Jan. 12, 2006). We should also mention that we're not counting opinions like Fuesting v. Zimmer, Inc., No. 04-2158 (7th Cir. May 22, 2006), that simply modify rulings handed down last year.

posted by pn at 12:55 PM  

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.