Innovation Ventures, L.L.C. v. Custom Nutrition Labs., L.L.C.
This case involves a consideration of motions by both the plaintiff and the defendant to exclude the testimony of the other party’s expert witness on the basis of Daubert and the Federal Rules of Evidence. The plaintiff’s expert offered testimony on how to calculate lost profits based on the plaintiff’s market share. The defendant’s expert offered testimony as to weaknesses in the plaintiff’s calculations and opinions on damages. The court denied both of these cross-motions.
The District Court Refuses to Throw Out Experts Under Daubert Motions, Citing Differences in Admissibility and Scrutiny Under Cross-Examination
This case involves a consideration of motions by both the plaintiff and the defendant to exclude the testimony of the other party’s expert witness on the basis of Daubert and the Federal Rules of Evidence. The plaintiff’s expert offered testimony on how to calculate lost profits based on the plaintiff’s market share. The defendant’s expert offered testimony as to weaknesses in the plaintiff’s calculations and opinions on damages. The court denied both of these cross-motions.
Daubert Rulings Reflect Courts’ Disparate Views on Gatekeeping Role
As several recent court decisions show, different judges interpret the gatekeeping role, which they assume under Rule 702 and Daubert, very differently. Some courts take a liberal approach while others favor close scrutiny of the expert’s qualifications and proposed opinion.
Recent Daubert rulings show courts’ different takes on the role of gatekeeper
A series of recent Daubert cases illustrate how different courts may interpret the role of “gatekeeper,” which they perform under Rule 702 and Daubert.
Missouri says yes to Daubert
Missouri's governor recently signed into law a bill in favor of adopting the Daubert standard applicable to the admissibility of expert testimony. The move by the governor apparently is the first in several major tort reform measures he hopes to accomplish during his term.