Broward Injury Lawyer Blog
Three year ago, Florida Gov. Rick Scott signed into law amendments to F.S. 90.702 to F.S. 90.704 that changes the standard by which Florida courts determine whether expert witness testimony should be admissible. Previously, we used the “Frye standard,” which asks only whether the technique of the expert is generally accepted as reliable in the relevant scientific community. The legislative change has now instead using the “Daubert standard,” which is more stringent and requires something of a mini-trial in front of a judge before the case can proceed. Questions raise include not just whether the technique is generally accepted, but questions whether there has been empirical testing, whether there has been peer review and publication, whether there is a known or potential error rate, whether there is a maintenance of these standards and more. 
The Florida Supreme Court is considering a proposal that would revert the courts back to the Frye standard. (The Florida courts can take action without the legislators on this point because it concerns a procedural element of the court.) Civil plaintiff attorneys argue the Daubert standards are too stringent and serve as a barrier to legal remedy in legitimate claims.
To understand why the importance of this standard matters in civil personal injury lawsuits, we look at the recent case of Sims v. Kia Motors of America, before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. Here, the viability of expert witness testimony was critical to the product liability claim in a wrongful death lawsuit stemming from a fatal car accident. Continue reading
