Kumho Tire Co. v. Carmichael

BVLaw
Full Text of Court Cases
March 23, 1999

Access the Full Article

This article is available with a subscription to any of these products:
It is also available in these products:
Already a subscriber or product owner?  Login
This article is also available for purchase. (5,993 words)   Add to Cart >>
Need help? Contact us:
1-503-479-8200 ext 2 or sales@bvresources.com
3011 Tires and Inner Tubes
326211 Tire Manufacturing (except Retreading)
evidence
expert testimony
Kumho Tire Co. v. Carmichael
119 S. Ct. 1167,1999 U.S. LEXIS 2189
US
Federal Court
Supreme Court
Dennis Carlson, Jr (for plaintiff)
Breyer

Summary

At issue is the admittance of expert testimony.

See Also

Supreme Court Affirms 'Gatekeeper' Duty of Trial Courts for Expert Evidence

Legal and Court Case Update
May 1999

In this product liability case, the trial court ruled that the expert testimony of the plaintiffs' tire failure analysis expert was inadmissible because it was not reliable.

This article also appears in:
Business Valuation & Bankruptcy Compendium, Third Edition
The Comprehensive Guide to Economic Damages, Seventh Edition
Daubert Challenges: The Courts Raise the Bar