What has a decade of Daubert wrought?

M.A. Berger

American Journal of Public Health, 2005, vol. 95, issue S1, S59-S65

Abstract: There have been changes within the judicial system that may be attributable to opinions on the admissibility of expert testimony that began with the Supreme Court's 1993 decision in Daubert v Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. After surveying Daubert and subsequent related Supreme Court opinions, I examine a number of questions. Do the factors courts apply post-Daubert in ruling on the admissibility of expert testimony make scientific sense? Has Daubert had an impact on the willingness of scientists to become expert witnesses? What do we know about Daubert's impact on improving science in the court room? What has been Daubert's effect on access to the courts? Does Daubert further public policy objectives of protecting the public against harm?

Date: 2005
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (2)

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.2105/AJPH.2004.044701

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:aph:ajpbhl:10.2105/ajph.2004.044701_7

DOI: 10.2105/AJPH.2004.044701

Access Statistics for this article

American Journal of Public Health is currently edited by Alfredo Morabia

More articles in American Journal of Public Health from American Public Health Association
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Christopher F Baum ().