Tuesday, April 13, 2004

Texas Follows in Weisgram's Footsteps

In correspondence from Jim Dedman, who monitors Texas decisions for our parent site, we learn of an article in the April 2004 Texas Bar Journal discussing Kerr McGee Corp. v. Helton, 47 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 248 (Jan. 30, 2004) -- a decision in which the Texas Supreme Court held that exclusion of expert testimony after trial, on appeal, does not necessarily warrant remand for a new trial, where the proponent was on fair notice of the objection. This outcome essentially reprises Weisgram v. Marley Co., 528 U.S. 440 (2000).
Fed. R. Evid. 702: 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 of the case.