In 1993, the US Supreme Court’s opinion in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc. addressed the admissibility of expert scientific testimony in federal trials, affirming a gatekeeping role for judges in determining the reliability and relevance of the testimony.
In 1999, the Supreme Court’s decision in Kumho Tire Co. v. Carmichael clarified that the Daubert criteria were applicable to all types of expert testimony in federal jurisdictions, not merely testimony relating to science. Subsequently, many state courts also adopted the Daubert standard.
This study analyzes post-Kumho Tire (2000–2013) challenges to financial expert witnesses under the Daubert standards. We identify observable trends in the frequency and outcome of these challenges based on written opinions in federal and state courts.