Question: What are the landmark principles regarding expert testimony as established by the well-known case of Daubert v Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.?
Answer: According to the cited reference, “First, it recognized the trial judge as the “gatekeeper” who must screen proffered expert testimony. Second, the objective of the screening is to ensure that expert testimony, in order to be admissible, must be “not only relevant, but reliable…… To determine whether proffered scientific testimony or evidence satisfies the standard of evidentiary reliability, a judge must ascertain whether it is “ground[ed] in the methods and procedures of science…..The Court also mentioned as indicators of good science whether the technique or theory has been subjected to peer review or publication, whether the existence of known or potential error rates has been determined, and whether standards exist for controlling the technique’s operation. In addition, although general acceptance of the methodology within the scientific community is no longer dispositive, it remains a factor to be considered.” (Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence, Third Edition, The National Academies Press, Washington, DC)