Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Publication
- File Type
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Evidence
Admissibility Of Scientific Evidence Under Daubert: The Fatal Flaws Of ‘Falsifiability’ And ‘Falsification’, Barbara P. Billauer Esq
Admissibility Of Scientific Evidence Under Daubert: The Fatal Flaws Of ‘Falsifiability’ And ‘Falsification’, Barbara P. Billauer Esq
barbara p billauer esq
Abstract: The Daubert mantra demands that judges, acting as gatekeepers, prevent para, pseudo or ‘bad’ science from infiltrating the courtroom. To do so, the Judges must first determine what “science” is? And then, what ‘good science’ is? It is submitted that Daubert is seriously polluted with the notions of Karl Popper who sets ‘falsifiability’ and ‘falsification’ as the demarcation line for that determination. This inapt philosophy has intractably infected case law, leading to bad decisions immortalized as stare decisis. Among other problems, is the intolerance of Popper’s system for multiple causation, a key component of toxic- torts. Thus, the primary …
Schultz V. Akzo Nobel Paints: “The Rest Of The Story” Reveals Limited Impact Of Expert Testimony Decision, Richard O. Faulk
Schultz V. Akzo Nobel Paints: “The Rest Of The Story” Reveals Limited Impact Of Expert Testimony Decision, Richard O. Faulk
Richard Faulk
Certainly, a number of lawyers from both sides of the bar believe that the Schultz decision is important. A review of the record in Schultz, however, reveals a relatively easy explanation for the decision—one that undermines its value as precedent. To understand why this is so, we must go back to the district court’s decision to grant Akzo Nobel’s motion for summary judgment and, with apologies to Paul Harvey, appreciate the “rest of the story.”