Make sure your carbon monoxide engineering expert complies “below taken from Early v. Toyota Motor Corp., 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 36011 (E.D. Ky., May 16, 2007).
First, a court must determine whether the expert is qualified to offer opinions in a particular subject area. Once the court determines that an expert is qualified to offer opinions in a particular subject area, it must consider whether the expert’s opinion is reliable. In Daubert, HN2the Supreme Court suggested that the issue of reliability turns on whether an expert’s reasoning or methodology is scientifically valid [**6] or whether that reasoning or methodology can be properly applied to the facts in issue. In considering an expert’s reliability, trial court’s should consider the following:
- Whether the theory or technique has been tested;
- Whether the theory or technique has been subjected to peer review;
- The known or potential rate of error and whether there are standards controlling the technique’s operation; an
- Whether the theory or technique has gained general acceptance in the relevant scientific community.
Daubert, 509 U.S. 593-594. 2 In making reliability determinations, the court’s inquiry must be specific to the particular issues in each case. Kumho Tire Company, 526 U.S. at 156. [*637] In other words, a trial court must decide whether an expert has sufficient specialized knowledge to assist the jury in deciding the issues in the case. Accordingly, an expert’s conclusions regarding causation must have a basis in established fact and cannot be premised on subjective beliefs or mere suppositions. McLean v 988011 Ontario, Ltd., 224 F.3d 797, 800-801 (6th Cir. 2000).
