Also known as: generally accept · generally accepts · generally accepting · GAAP
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A factor used to evaluate the reliability of expert testimony under Federal Rule of Evidence 702. It asks whether the expert's theory or methodology enjoys widespread recognition and endorsement within the relevant scientific or technical community.
DataShield Inc. offers Dr. Rivera to explain how a rival's encryption was breached using a self-created algorithm never published or used outside his lab. NimbusCloud moves to exclude the testimony. The court grants the motion because the method lacks testing, peer review, and general acceptance in the cybersecurity field.
Carmichael offers an engineer who attributes a tire failure to manufacturing defects based solely on years of field inspections. Kumho Tire moves to exclude the testimony. The court evaluates whether the engineer's approach has produced erroneous results in the past and whether it enjoys general acceptance in the engineering community.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Michael M. challenges a statutory rape law as resting on outdated stereotypes about protecting female chastity. The concurring opinion notes that even if that motive once existed, courts will not invalidate an otherwise valid statute merely because the original rationale is no longer generally accepted.
Atkins challenges his death sentence by citing opinion polls showing declining public support for executing intellectually disabled offenders. The Court cautions that the polls must be conducted according to generally accepted scientific principles before they can reliably inform the Eighth Amendment analysis.
Leland is convicted after Oregon requires him to prove insanity beyond a reasonable doubt. He argues the standard violates due process because it deviates from the approach generally accepted in other states. The Court upholds the conviction, finding no constitutional requirement that states follow the majority practice.
Exxon Shipping faces a massive punitive award arising from the Valdez oil spill. The company argues the calculation rests on methods not generally accepted in maritime or economic literature. The Court examines whether the approach satisfies reliability standards before allowing the award to stand.
General acceptance in the relevant scientific community is one flexible, nonexclusive factor courts may consider when deciding whether expert methodology is reliable. It is neither necessary nor sufficient by itself. A court may still admit testimony that lacks general acceptance if other reliability indicators such as testing or peer review are strong.
Supporting sources
Yes. Novelty alone does not bar admission. The court must still assess whether the method is reliable through testing, peer review, known error rates, or standards. General acceptance is only one factor and does not rigidly control the outcome.
Supporting sources
The absence of testing, peer review, and general acceptance strongly supports exclusion. The proponent must demonstrate that the methodology itself is reliable before the testimony reaches the jury. Failure to make that showing requires the court to exclude the opinion.
Supporting sources
…circuit at the time was the so-called Frye test: Scientific evidence was admissible if it was based on a scientific technique generally accepted as reliable within the scientific community. Frye v. United States , 293 F. 1013, 1014 (D.C.Cir.1923).[^maj-2] We found that the district court properly applied this standard, and…