Case Law and Speaking Update:
To keep you up on the Case law on Expert Testimony, I offer 3 cases which give you Florida's evolving view:
The newest is "Booker v. Sumter Cnty. Sheriff's Office/N. American Risk Services 40 Fla. L. Weekly D1291 (May 29, 2015):
Booker comments on the significant case of Perez v. Bell South Telecommunications Inc. 138 So 3rd 492 (3rd DCA 2014) a lengthy decision by Judge Shepard, and, most essentially, Booker speaks to the "timeliness" of filing objections. In essence, Booker says: DO NOT TRY TO SANDBAG YOUR OPPONENT. At least, do not wait too long to file an objection to an expert, or you will aggravate the judge, and that judge may strike your objection. Booker then takes a closer look at the admissibility of experts, referring to Perez and the case of Giaimo v. Florida Autosport, Inc . 154 SO 3rd 385 (1st DCA 2015) analyzing more closely what is "pure opinion" and what is a sufficient DAUBERT analysis, weighing carefully the issue of admissibility.
Note that Booker and Giamo are cases from the 1st DCA, and Perez is from the 3rd DCA. The SUPREMES have not weighed in this year, but I believe they will be asked to by year's end.
The above 3 cases give you pretty much all the law and language you need to argue the admissibility or exclusion of an expert in State Court. Of Course, since Florida now follows Federal Court decisions, you can go from there.
This year I spoke to both Defense Attorneys at the WINDSTORM CONFERENCE in New Orleans, and Plaintiffs' attorneys at the FJA "WORKHORSE" CONFERENCE in West Palm on issues related to admissibility or believability of experts.
As a mediator, arbitrator, and consultant, I think it's important to keep up with the law, and stay in contact with the concerns of all litigators. I hope this information is helpful to you. If you need further advice, let me know.
©Copyright 2016 | Ellen Leesfield Consulting | 305-487-7490