As we reported last week, the Florida Supreme Court recently invalidated a 2013 legislative amendment that required courts to use the Daubert standard to assess the admissibility of expert testimony. Dr. Michael Crain (Florida Atlantic University) says the high court’s recent ruling “marks a clear break of Florida courts from federal courts.” It means that, in state court, testifying experts are subject to the Frye standard, whereas, in federal court, expert testimony is subject to the Daubert requirements, Crain explains. “For forensic accounting expert witnesses, this likely means their work will be scrutinized less in Florida cases compared to federal cases,” Crain says. As he sees it: “Neither evidence standard is perfect. In the end, fairness to the parties concerns the courts. Fairness is about more than evidence quality.” Crain’s analysis of the recent high court ruling may be found here.