Experts — Gatekeeper Role of Court — Countervailing Considerations and Jury Issues

From Sudo Properties, Inc. v. Terebonne Parish, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 50559 (E.D. La. July 2, 2008):

It is important to note that when expert testimony or reports are challenged under Daubert, the Court's role as a gatekeeper does not replace either the traditional adversary system, or the jury's place within the system. Scordill v. Louisville Ladder Group, L.L.C., 2003 WL 22427981 at *3 (E.D. La. Oct. 24, 2003). As the Daubert court noted, "vigorous cross-examination, presentation of contrary evidence, and careful instruction on the burden of proof are the traditional and appropriate means of attacking shaky but admissible evidence." Daubert, 509 U.S. at 596. As a general rule, questions relating to the bases and sources of an expert's opinion, rather than its admissibility, should be left for the jury's consideration. United States v. 14.38 Acres of Land, More or Less S. in County, Miss., 80 F.3d 1074, 1077 (5th Cir. 1996) (citing Viterbo v. Dow Chemical Co., 826 F.2d 420, 422 (5th Cir. 1987)).

Share this article:


Recent Posts