Mealey's Daubert
-
February 19, 2026
Ga. Supreme Court: Expert Testimony Properly Admitted, Murder Conviction Affirmed
ATLANTA — The Georgia Supreme Court upheld a murder conviction, rejecting arguments that the trial court erred in allowing an expert to testify about testing that was done to prove that the fatal gunshot was not self-inflicted.
-
February 19, 2026
Judge Allows Experts, Certifies Class On Whether UM/UIM Coverage Properly Applied
PHOENIX — An Arizona federal judge agreed to certify a class action alleging that an insurer underpaid insureds by failing to stack uninsured motorist (UM) or underinsured motorist (UIM) coverage for policyholders who had multivehicle policies and rejected efforts by the insurer to exclude expert testimony on class certification.
-
February 18, 2026
Federal Circuit Emphasizes Court’s Gatekeeping Role In Affirming Patent Verdict
WASHINGTON, D.C. — A Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel on Feb. 17 affirmed a Minnesota federal judge’s denial of defendant-appellants’ requests for judgment as a matter of law (JMOL) or for a new trial on damages; the panel emphasized that its role on appeal was to determine whether the jury had substantial evidence to support its findings, not to reweigh that evidence.
-
February 18, 2026
Amicus Urges High Court Review Of Expert Admissibility Standards In Injury Dispute
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The Washington Legal Foundation (WLF) on Feb. 17 filed an amicus curiae brief in the U.S. Supreme Court arguing that it should grant the petition for a writ of certiorari filed by Union Carbide Corp. and an affiliate in a dispute over the correct legal standard for the admissibility of an expert in an ethylene oxide (EtO) injury case because it “raises a profound question about the integrity of our federal justice system—whether trial judges must faithfully enforce Federal Rule of Evidence 702 as a bulwark against unreliable expert testimony, or whether they must sidestep that duty and pass the buck to juries.”
-
February 13, 2026
Ethylene Oxide Defendants Seek High Court Review Of Expert Admissibility Standards
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Union Carbide Corp. and an affiliate have filed a petition for a writ of certiorari in the U.S. Supreme Court, arguing that a lower court applied the incorrect legal standard for the admissibility of an expert under Federal Rule of Evidence 702 in a lawsuit over alleged injuries caused by exposure to ethylene oxide. The petitioners say that the Supreme Court should hear the case because federal appellate courts are divided over whether challenges to the factual basis of an expert’s opinion “always go to weight, not admissibility.”
-
February 09, 2026
Experts Opining On Data To Consider Class Certification Partially Admitted
CHICAGO — A federal judge in Illinois partially granted and partially denied dueling motions to exclude experts from testifying in a putative class action related to allegedly defective transmissions on Ford Motor Co. trucks.
-
February 09, 2026
Construction Expert Can Testify In Breach Of Contract Dispute In Virgin Islands
ST. THOMAS, Virgin Islands — An expert retained by a construction company can testify in a breach of contract case because his opinions meet the reliability test under Federal Rule of Evidence 702 and questions on how he reached those conclusions are “grist for cross-examination, not exclusion,” a federal magistrate judge in the Virgin Islands said.
-
February 06, 2026
Judge Certifies Classes In Juul Antitrust Suit, Denies Opposing Daubert Motions
SAN FRANCISCO — A California federal judge on Feb. 5 entered a short form order announcing his rulings certifying several classes of purchasers bringing antitrust claims against Juul Labs Inc. (JLI) and Altria Group Inc. for allegedly seeking to monopolize the e-cigarette market and increasing prices after Altria in 2018 invested in JLI and denied the opposing parties’ Daubert motions to exclude each other’s experts.
-
February 03, 2026
Use-Of-Force Expert Can Testify On Whether Deputies Acted Within Standards
TACOMA, Wash. — A Washington federal magistrate judge on Feb. 2 denied a motion to bar a police practices and use-of-force expert from opining that the actions of two police deputies were within generally accepted police standards.
-
February 02, 2026
9th Circuit: Judge Properly Found Securities Claims Against Crypto Firm Barred
SAN FRANCISCO — A Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel affirmed a lower court’s order granting a motion from an issuer of crypto tokens and its CEO to dismiss class action securities claims against them, finding that the 2017 offering of the tokens was a separate offering from the 2013 offering, making the federal securities claims time-barred.
-
January 30, 2026
Wash. Federal Judge Says Safety Expert Can Testify In Slip-And-Fall Case
SEATTLE — An expert retained by a woman who says she was injured after slipping in a bank’s parking lot can testify, but his testimony will be limited to topics he previously disclosed in his expert report, a Washington federal judge held Jan. 29.
-
January 27, 2026
Experts Featured In Mealey’s Daubert Report
Entries are in alphabetical order of the expert in each area of expert testimony. Experts appeared in the January 2026 issue of Mealey’s Daubert Report.
-
January 27, 2026
J&J Asks High Court To Decide If Experts Must Meet Daubert For Class Certification
WASHINGTON, D.C. — A woman asked the U.S. Supreme Court for an extension to respond to a petition for writ of certiorari filed by Johnson & Johnson Consumer Inc. (J&J), which asks the court to rule on whether expert testimony on damages during the class certification stage must comply with Federal Rule of Evidence 702, Fed. R. Evid. 702, and Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc.
-
January 27, 2026
Judge: Genetic Experts May Opine Only On General Causation In Asbestos Case
NEW ORLEANS — A Louisiana judge partially granted a man’s motion in limine challenging two experts, saying they may offer general causation opinions on the role genetics played in mesothelioma but not opinions about the specific cause of the man’s disease.
-
January 27, 2026
Texas Appeals Court Reverses Med-Mal Defense Verdict, Says Expert Wrongly Excluded
EL PASO, Texas — A Texas appeals court remanded a medical malpractice case for a new trial after finding that a woman’s expert on the standard of care was wrongly excluded from testifying.
-
January 26, 2026
Judge: Property’s Expert On What Caused Collapse Can Testify In Insurance Dispute
PHILADELPHIA — An insurance company may disagree with the conclusions reached by an expert retained by an insured in a breach of contract case, “but that does not mean those conclusions are unreliable,” a Pennsylvania federal judge ruled Jan. 23.
-
January 26, 2026
Federal Magistrate Judge Recommends Excluding Expert In Injury Case As Unreliable
LAS VEGAS — A federal magistrate judge in Nevada recommended that an expert retained by a woman who alleges that she was injured in a Target store be barred from testifying because his opinions are unreliable under Federal Rule of Evidence 702 and Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc.
-
January 26, 2026
7th Circuit Reverses Summary Judgment For Lawnmower Maker, Allows Expert Testimony
CHICAGO — A trial court did not consider opinions by an expert witness hired by a woman who was injured in a riding lawnmower accident who opined that an independent brake could have prevented the accident, the Seventh Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled, reversing summary judgment for the lawnmower manufacturer and remanding the case.
-
January 23, 2026
Special Master Allows Asbestos, Causation Opinions In Talc MDL
TRENTON, N.J. — In a more than 650-page report and recommendation, a special master in the Johnson & Johnson ovarian cancer asbestos-talc multidistrict litigation said plaintiffs’ experts could testify regarding causation and migration of talc fibers into the upper reproductive tract after perineal application, affirming a ruling originally issued in 2020.
-
January 23, 2026
Md. Appeals Court: Detective Qualified To Testify On Origin Of Threatening Messages
BALTIMORE — A Maryland appeals court rejected arguments from a woman who contended that a state trial court erred in allowing a police detective to testify as an expert on cell phones and upheld her conviction for perjury and making a false statement.
-
January 23, 2026
Judge: Experts Can Testify In Bench Trial Before Ruling On Daubert Motions
NEW YORK — A New York federal judge denied without prejudice dueling motions to exclude experts in a contract dispute, ruling that she will hear the experts’ testimony during a bench trial and that the parties can renew their motions after that, if needed.
-
January 23, 2026
11th Circuit: No Error In Excluding, Limiting Experts In Criminal Case
ATLANTA — A trial court did not abuse its discretion in limiting the expert testimony of one witness and excluding another, the 11th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals held, affirming a former teacher’s conviction for sexually abusing his students.
-
January 23, 2026
Defendants Score Summary Judgment Win In Pension Actuarial Equivalence Case
MINNEAPOLIS — Concluding “that actuarial equivalence does not require reasonable underlying assumptions” and distinguishing five cases in which she said Ian Altman’s expert testimony concerning actuarial equivalence wasn’t excluded, a Minnesota federal judge excluded Altman’s testimony under Federal Rule of Evidence 702(c) and then repeatedly credited the opposing expert’s testimony in granting summary judgment for the defendants in the Employee Retirement Income Security Act suit concerning early retirement benefits.
-
January 21, 2026
Split Federal Circuit Says Judge Wrongly Excluded Experts From Patent Row
WASHINGTON, D.C. — A split Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel on Jan. 20 reversed a Pennsylvania federal judge’s decision to exclude two expert witnesses in a dispute brought by a physician who claims DePuy Synthes Sales Inc. and related DePuy entities induced surgeons to infringe certain claims of his patents; the panel majority held that the judge wrongly treated claim construction and survey methodology questions as admissibility issues and not questions for a jury.
-
January 20, 2026
In School District’s PCB Case Against Monsanto, Haggling Over Experts Continues
BURLINGTON, Vt. — The Burlington School District (BSD) and Monsanto Co. on Jan. 16 filed multiple reply briefs in Vermont federal court battling over the inclusion of witnesses in the BSD’s lawsuit alleging contamination from polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). The BSD says there are numerous errors in the testimony of Monsanto’s experts, and Monsanto maintains that the BSD’s experts do not meet the standard set by Federal Rule of Evidence 702.