Skip to main content

Maritime Law: Florida's Governor Signs Expert Witness Testimony Bill


Today, Governor Rick Scott of Florida reportedly signed a bill changing the state standard for accepting testimony from expert witnesses. This law is huge as it switches the state's Frye standard to the federal Daubert rule. Florida was only one of 10 states still using the Frye test, a standard established in 1923 that allowed expert testimony as long as it came from qualified experts who adhered to generally accepted scientific principles in their field.
The Daubert standard, named for the 1993 U.S. Supreme Court decision Daubert v. Merrell Down Pharmaceuticals, focuses more on the scientific methodology and its relevance to the facts of the case. Experts under Daubert must have the training to give an opinion on a theory or technique that has been scientifically tested and published in peer-reviewed journals.

The bill, labeled HB 7015, was supported by the business community primarily to do away with what it derided as "junk science" testimony in personal injury and malpractice litigation. However, it was opposed by civil plaintiffs attorneys and criminal prosecutors who maintained the change would bog down cases with needless hearings. The bill requires the more stringent federal standard for expert testimony even though critics claim it will drastically increase the cost of litigation and put new burdens on an already strained state judicial system.
Legal analysts with trial court experience in Daubert hearings say that judges have a tendency to use Daubert to pre-try a case and grant summary judgment in a manner that discourages appeals. This is due in part to a tendency of courts to selectively cite materials submitted in a misleading manner. Commentators representing civil plaintiffs expect that with this change, defendants are going to regularly file motions challenging the validity of expert opinions. I have to agree with this assessment, given my own use of Daubert in federal court.

Today, the Daily Business Review reported a 2011 PricewaterhouseCoopers' study on the effects of the Daubert standard. It found a 250 percent increase in Daubert challenges to all types of experts from 2000 to 2010. In 2010, there was a 49 percent success rate in witness testimony being stricken in whole or in part. This could be hugely detrimental since in many cases, expert witnesses do not live in the jurisdiction where the case will be tried. This entails the expert witness travelling, giving testimony and answering the judge's questions in a Daubert hearing. This will certainly increase litigation costs for plaintiffs.
Florida's acceptance of Daubert increases the standard being the law to 41 states.

If you are interested in learning more about Daubert or would like to reach me, you may contact me at mov@chaloslaw.com.

 

 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Maritime Law--Florida's Arbitration Code Is Now Revised

Those of us that practice maritime law regularly must always be on the lookout for the contract that may contain an arbitration clause. Thus, any laws related to arbitration are important to those of us practicing in this sector.       The Florida legislature has revised the Florida Arbitration Code ("FAC") and named it the Revised Florida Arbitration Code (the " Revised Act"). Since 1967, the FAC had gone mostly unchanged. The Revised Act addresses concepts that were not addressed in the old law, such as the ability of arbitrators to issue provision remedies, challenges based on notice, consolidation of separate arbitration proceedings, required conflict disclosures by arbitrators, among other major changes. The Revised Act lays out a detailed framework for international arbitration conducted under Florida law and repeals sections of the FAC. The Revised Act spells out what experienced arbitrators knew the case law to be, but codifies it all in one pl

Maritime Law--U.S. Crewmember Required to Arbitrate Claims Applying Norwegian Law

In Alberts v. Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd ., No. 15-14775 (11th Cir. Aug. 23, 2016), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit held that a U.S. citizen, working aboard a Royal Caribbean cruise ship is required to arbitrate his claims against Royal Caribbean. Plaintiff, a United States citizen, worked as the lead trumpeter on a passenger Royal Caribbean cruise ship. The ship is a Bahamian flagged vessel with a home port in Fort Lauderdale, Florida. Royal Caribbean, the operator of the vessel, is a Liberian corporation with its principal place of business in Florida. After plaintiff became ill while working for Royal Caribbean, he filed suit alleging unseaworthiness, negligence, negligence under the Jones Act, maintenance and cure, and seaman’s wages and penalties. Royal Caribbean moved to compel arbitration, and the district court granted the motion. This appeal presented an issue of first impression: Whether a seaman’s work in international waters on a cruise ship

Maritime Law--Jury Hits Royal Caribbean Cruises With $20.3M Verdict for Officer's Hand Injury

In Spearman v. Royal Caribbean Cruises , Case No. 2011-023730-CA-01, a Miami-Dade County, Florida jury has awarded $20.3 million to a former crewmember of Royal Caribbean Cruises, whose hand was crushed while coming to the aid of a fellow worker during an emergency test in 2008. After a three-week trial, the jury found the Miami-based cruise company negligent in operating an unseaworthy ship and 100 percent liable for the injuries suffered by Lisa Spearman, who was working an officer on Royal Caribbean’s Voyager of the Seas . Spearman sued the company in 2011, three years after her right hand was caught in a watertight power door during a fire-safety drill. According to her lawyers, Spearman was trying to prevent the door from closing on the ship’s nurse when her hand was pulled into a recess pocket of the sliding door and crushed.  The nurse allegedly breached the company’s safety protocol when she stumbled through the door, prompting the response from Spearman. Accordin