Also known as: Daubert standards · Daubert · Daubert test · Daubert rule · Daubert criteria
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A standard governing the admissibility of expert testimony that requires federal courts to act as gatekeepers ensuring the testimony is both relevant and reliable. Reliability is assessed through a flexible case-specific inquiry that may consider whether the expert's theory or methodology has been tested, subjected to peer review and publication, possesses a known or potential error rate, maintains standards controlling its operation, and enjoys general acceptance in the relevant field.
Dominic Drake sued Decker Electronics after a prototype drone crashed during testing. Decker offered an aerospace engineer who used a proprietary fluid-dynamics model to show that wind shear alone caused the failure. The district court conducted a Daubert hearing, found the model rested on tested principles with published methodology papers, and admitted the testimony over Drake's objection that the model lacked accident-specific validation.
Devon Drake sued Dillon Energy claiming a turbine design caused his injuries. Dillon's expert extrapolated from limited laptop tests to conclude the turbine met industry standards. The district court excluded the testimony because the gap between the informal data and the broad real-world opinion was too great, and the appellate court affirmed under abuse-of-discretion review.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Delilah Duran sued Dynamic Solutions for patent infringement involving a facial-recognition algorithm. Dynamic Solutions offered a computer scientist whose self-developed benchmarking script had never been peer-reviewed outside the company. The district court applied the reliability analysis to this technical testimony and excluded the opinion after finding insufficient validation of the method's application to the accused code.
Damian Decker challenged a lethal-injection protocol and moved to exclude a pharmacy dean's testimony on midazolam's properties. The district court found the dean well qualified, determined the methodology reliable under the flexible standard, and admitted the testimony after a Daubert hearing.
Destiny Davis sought class certification against Drake Logistics alleging a pattern of discriminatory pay practices. Her statistician relied on a regression model using company data. The court applied the reliability standard to the technical analysis and found the methodology sufficiently grounded to support the motion.
Daniel Diaz sued Dynamic Solutions for securities fraud and offered an economist's event study to prove loss causation. The study used a custom index and selective day exclusions. The district court conducted the required reliability review and admitted the testimony after confirming the methods were properly applied to the facts.
Appellate courts review a district court's decision to admit or exclude expert testimony for abuse of discretion. The trial court enjoys broad latitude in deciding both relevance and reliability.
Supporting sources
No. The analysis applies to all expert testimony based on scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge. Courts retain discretion to consider the traditional factors or other appropriate indicia of reliability suited to the field.
Supporting sources
A court may exclude the testimony when the gap is too great and the conclusions are not supported by sufficient facts or reliable methodology. This determination lies within the trial court's discretion.
Supporting sources
No. The factors are illustrative and not a rigid checklist. A court may find testimony reliable even if some factors are not met, provided the overall methodology rests on a sound foundation and is reliably applied.
Supporting sources
Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. <!-- acedexams opinion md v1 -- Case information - Citation: 509 U.S. 579, 592 (1993) Majority opinion Opinion of Judge…