Related Posts
https://joinfishbowl.com/bowl_krzopya5m4
Hey!! People... Would request all the CA, CMA and CS professionals to join this bowl. So that people can share vacancies in Industry and refer each other...Bcoz after working in big 4 after sometime...we all know it's not possible to continue 😂😂!!
Please share with your friends as well
Have prices gone up post pandemic?
Additional Posts in Law
Best divorce lawyer in NYC?
New to Fishbowl?
Download the Fishbowl app to
unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
Find examples of dauberts written by good firms in cases in your circuit and borrow structure / argument if applicable. At least will give you the right cases to read.
Did your firm hire an opposing expert? Is there a report?
Having drafted numerous orders on daubert motions, my advice is keep organization at the forefront. Keep each factor separately, track it like the circuit courts do—it makes it easier for the reader to follow. This is also factually intensive so templates won’t really help you. The deposition is going to be your main support. You got this!!
(4) any statements (admittedly unusual with engineering experts) which are basic information and for which an expert is not needed by a jury should be cited (usually conclusory statements).
Look to your expert’s rebuttal for structure and deposition testimony for background. Hit the five factors but try undermine the helpfulness of the expert’s testimony. The judge’s inclination will often be to allow the expert and let you challenge credibility on cross, so you should to explain why allowing their expert to testify would be harmful to the functioning of the trial (e.g. the method is so unreliable that it would lead to juror confusion).
If your partner doesn’t want to talk, that’s really obnoxious and will likely result in a giant waste of time. I’d respectfully ask the partner if he/she would be willing to review an outline of your thoughts (which you can assure them will be based on a detailed review of the record). Always leave a paper trail.
There is great advice here. It renewed my faith in the profession for a moment.
Ask your expert engineer. They probably have run across the same issues many times before. They may even have samples or can provide cases with samples on the same issue.
So I’ve reviewed our expert’s rebuttal report and I see why he’s saying the other expert is wrong. I’m just having trouble translating that to grounds for exclusion according to the law if that makes sense
Unfortunately you’ll either going to suck at this no matter what or the partner cares so little he/she will just sign off.
I would recommend making a friend who has done these before and getting them to review/help you.
Read case law and the report and think about: (1) are all aspects of the report within his specialized knowledge and does he provide a sufficient basis for that knowledge? (2) does he explain exactly how he got to his answer and what assumptions he relied on? In other words, was it appropriate for him to rely on certain assumptions and did he “show his work.” (3) similar but are his methods tested and reliable? (4) are there any portions of the report where his specialized knowledge is unnecessary/the jury can determine that fact without an expert. E.g., did he attempt to evaluate a witness’s credibility or bad faith? (5) did he speculate as to anything? (6) does he use any legal terminology or legal conclusions? Note, although I’m sure you want to exclude him fully, you can also try to exclude portions of his report that are inappropriate.
As others have said, see if he has ever been excluded and ask your expert for any areas to attack (to the extent you can’t figure it out from rebuttal report).
1) Type in ChatGPT “how to approach drafting a Daubert motion for an engineering expert” Notably, all tips already provided are included in the approach. 2) Ask the partner to direct you to a motion that he views as excellent work product.
I don't work in this field of law, but in general DO take three to five hours just to understand the tech. Really understand it. Then write. Could you ask to be staffed with someone of intermediate seniority for guidance?
Your firm should have previously prepared Daubert motions that you can review/study/borrow from.
If you’re looking for other ways to exclude their expert, see if you can find previous cases where they served as an expert and see what those daubers motions looked like? Same methods but the methods are BS?