• Question
  • Solved
  • Share
  • Tweet
The courts both before and after Daubert have found other factors relevant in determining whether expert testimony is sufficiently reliable to be considered by the trier of fact. Explain these factors and how important these may be to a case.

What will be an ideal response?

  • #1
  • Answer
Answer: • Whether experts are proposing to testify about matters growing naturally and directly out of research
they have conducted independent of the litigation, or whether they have developed their opinions
expressly for purposes of testifying
• Whether the expert has unjustifiably extrapolated from an accepted premise to an unfounded
• Whether the expert has adequately accounted for obvious alternative explanations
• Whether the expert is being as careful as he would be in his regular professional work outside his paid
litigation consulting
• Whether the field of expertise claimed by the expert is known to reach reliable results for the type of
opinion the expert would give

  • #2
Thank you for your help.