CrFA Litigation Support & Expert Witnessing 2

Question 1

Under the 2023 amendment to Federal Rule of Evidence 702, what standard must the proponent meet to show that expert testimony is admissible?

Accepted Answer

Preponderance of the evidence

Answer

The 2023 amendment clarified that the proponent must show it is more likely than not that the Rule 702 requirements are met.

Question 2

Which U.S. Supreme Court case extended the Daubert gatekeeping function to non-scientific expert testimony, such as accounting testimony?

Accepted Answer

Kumho Tire Co. v. Carmichael

Answer

Kumho Tire (1999) held that the trial judge's gatekeeping duty applies to all expert testimony, including technical and other specialized knowledge.

Question 3

In General Electric Co. v. Joiner, what standard did the Supreme Court set for an appellate court reviewing a trial court's decision to admit or exclude expert testimony?

Accepted Answer

Abuse of discretion

Answer

Joiner held that appellate courts review Daubert rulings for abuse of discretion.

Question 4

Under FRCP 26(b)(4)(C), which communication between an attorney and a retained testifying expert is generally discoverable?

Accepted Answer

Communications about the expert's compensation for the study or testimony

Answer

Rule 26(b)(4)(C) protects attorney-expert communications except those about compensation, facts or data the attorney provided, and assumptions the attorney supplied.

Question 5

A forensic accountant is retained only as a consulting expert and will not testify. When can the opposing party usually obtain discovery of that expert's opinions?

Accepted Answer

Only on a showing of exceptional circumstances

Answer

FRCP 26(b)(4)(D) allows discovery from a non-testifying consulting expert only in exceptional circumstances or as provided in Rule 35(b).

CrFA - Certified Forensic Accountant Practice Test

CrFA - Certified Forensic Accountant Practice Test

CrFA Litigation Support & Expert Witnessing 2