"Admissibility under Daubert" refers to the
legal standard used by courts to determine whether expert testimony is
admissible in federal court. This standard originates from the U.S. Supreme
Court case *Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.*, 509 U.S. 579 (1993).
The Daubert standard is applied to assess whether an expert's scientific,
technical, or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact (such
as a jury) in understanding the evidence or determining a fact in issue.
Under the Daubert standard, the trial judge acts as a
"gatekeeper" to ensure that any and all scientific testimony or
evidence admitted is not only relevant but also reliable. The court considers
several factors to evaluate the admissibility of expert testimony:
1. Testability: Whether the theory or technique can be
and has been tested.
2. Peer Review
and Publication: Whether the theory or technique has been subjected to peer
review and publication.
3. Error Rate: The known or potential error rate of
the method used.
4. Standards and Controls: The existence and
maintenance of standards controlling the technique's operation.
5. General Acceptance: Whether the theory or technique is generally
accepted within the relevant scientific community.
The Daubert standard was further clarified and expanded
in subsequent cases, such as General Electric Co. v. Joiner and Kumho Tire Co.
v. Carmichael, which emphasized the trial judge's discretion and extended the
gatekeeping role to all expert testimony, not just scientific.
Overall, "admissibility under Daubert"
ensures that expert testimony presented in court is both relevant to the case
and based on a reliable foundation.