As readers of the Blog undoubtedly know, the amendments toughening up Fed. R. Evid. 702 became effective on December 1, 2023.\u00a0 Here are the precise changes again:<\/p>\n
Rule 702. Testimony by expert witnesses.<\/p>\n
\u201cA witness who is qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education may testify in the form of an opinion or otherwise if\u00a0the proponent demonstrates to the court that it is more likely than not that<\/em>:\u201d<\/p>\n \u201ca) the expert\u2019s scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will help the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue;\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cb) the testimony is based on sufficient facts or data;\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cc) the testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods; and\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cd)\u00a0the expert has reliably applied<\/span>\u00a0the expert\u2019s opinion reflects a reliable application of\u00a0<\/em>the principles and methods to the facts of the case.\u201d<\/p>\n New language in italics; deleted language struck out.<\/p>\n The three changes that the amended rule makes are:\u00a0 (1) putting the proponent\u2019s burden of proof (preponderance) into the black letter of Rule 702; (2) specifying that \u201cthe court\u201d \u2013 not a jury \u2013 must decide that all four of the substantive criteria for expert admissibility have been met; and (3), the court\u2019s gatekeeping obligation is to ensure that all expert testimony satisfies Rule 702\u2019s four requirements, especially that the expert\u2019s \u201cprinciples and methods\u201d are reliably applied to the case-specific facts.<\/p>\n