Law360 (August 17, 2018, 3:20 PM EDT) -- The U.S. Supreme Court's opinion in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, in interpreting Rule 702 of the Federal Rules of Evidence, laid out various nonexclusive criteria for consideration in evaluating proposed scientific evidence. One of them was peer review.
As the court put it: “The fact of publication (or lack thereof) in a peer reviewed journal … will be a relevant, though not dispositive, consideration in assessing the scientific validity of a particular technique or methodology on which an opinion is premised.”
Compared to other Daubert factors (or those described in the subsequent comments to Rule 702), the presence or absence of...
Stay ahead of the curve
In the legal profession, information is the key to success. You have to know what’s happening with clients, competitors, practice areas, and industries. Law360 provides the intelligence you need to remain an expert and beat the competition.
Access to case data within articles (numbers, filings, courts, nature of suit, and more.)
Access to attached documents such as briefs, petitions, complaints, decisions, motions, etc.
Create custom alerts for specific article and case topics and so much more!