Expert Testimony -- 2016



Motorola, Inc. v. Murray   (D.C. Court of Appeals)

Standard for admissibility of expert testimony in DC

The NAM filed two amicus briefs urging the District of Columbia Court of Appeals to review a claim regarding the admissibility of expert testimony in product litigation. This is an appeal of a lower court decision that permitted the “Frye test” rather than using the “Daubert test” in determining the admissibility of expert testimony. This litigation is important to manufacturers because liability decisions should be based on credible evidence. The NAM’s brief argued that 1) the Daubert standard is more in line with current D.C. law and is a fairer and more realistic test of expert testimony; 2) adoption of the updated standard would position D.C. courts to be better gatekeepers against unreliable expert testimony; and 3) moving to the “Daubert” standard would level the playing field for D.C. based businesses, who are at a competitive disadvantage by being subject to the “Frye” standard. In a win for manufacturers, the court agreed with NAM’s arguments.


Related Documents:
NAM brief  (October 24, 2014)