edged that the tire expert was appropriately qualified because of his long experience and expertise, but upheld exclusion of his testimony. The tire expert’s testimony, wrote Justice Breyer, was properly excluded because the expert failed to employ standards used by similar experts who make such assessments outside the courtroom.

Following the Kuhmo decision, the Federal Court codified this emerging body of law by amending Rule 702 of the Federal Rules of Evidence, as follows: If scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue, a witness qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education, may testify thereto in the form of an opinion or otherwise if (1) the testimony is based upon sufficient facts or data, (2) the testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods, and (3) the witness has applied the principles and methods reliably to the facts in case.

The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement