Evidence Code — Expert testimony — New or novel scientific evidence — Constitutional law — Separation of powers — Amendment to section 90.702 by which the Legislature sought to adopt Daubert standard and cease the application of Frye to expert testimony unconstitutionally infringed upon Court’s power to set procedural rules — Frye, not Daubert, is the appropriate test in Florida for determining reliability of expert testimony based upon new or novel scientific techniques — Discussion of distinction between substantive and procedural law — Torts — Product liability — Asbestos — Action against valve and pump manufacturer and cigarette manufacturers whose products contained asbestos alleging exposure to asbestos was substantial contributing factor to plaintiff’s mesothelioma — Causation — Expert testimony in instant case was properly admitted and should not have been excluded by district court of appeal — Medical causation testimony was not new or novel and was not subject to Frye analysis, and trial court in case at issue did not usurp jury’s role in evaluating credibility of experts and choosing between legitimate but conflicting scientific views — Remand to district court with instructions to remand to trial court to reinstate final judgment
43 Fla. L. Weekly S459a
The materials available at this website are for informational purposes only and not for the purpose of providing legal advice. You should contact your attorney to obtain advice with respect to any particular issue or problem. Use of and access to this Website or any of the e-mail links contained within the site do not create an attorney-client relationship between Abbey, Adams, Byelick & Mueller, L.L.P. and the user or browser. The opinions expressed at or through this site are the opinions of the individual author and may not reflect the opinions of the firm or any individual attorney.
opens in a new windowAbbey, Adams, Byelick, & Mueller XML Sitemap Index