|
Lawyers are often called to work with
accountants, CPAs, benefit, insurance, and/or compensation consultants and
agents who are asked to give their expert witness testimony utilizing
statistical measures related to affirmative action matters. This testimony
must be both relevant and reliable.
In March of 1999, the United States
Supreme Court issued a ruling in the Kumho Tire Co. v. Carmichael, 526
U.S. 137 (1999) case that defined when a reliability challenge exists. The
Supreme Court ruled that reliability must be established in all types of
expert testimony, both scientific and nonscientific. The Court held that
the role of a trial judge was that of "gatekeeper," regarding both the
relevance and reliability of all expert testimony. The Court stated that
the Daubert opinion (Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, 509 U.S. 579
(1993)) was not intended to be limited to scientific cases only. Instead,
it should apply to all fields of expert testimony. Providers of expert
witness testimony must be prepared to describe why an analysis was
utilized and why the analysis and related data can be considered reliably
sufficient. For "reliability," the Supreme Court has established four
separate, nonexclusive tests:
- it can be illustrated that the
theory or technique can be tested
- the data has been subjected to
peer review and publication
- there is a known or potential
rate of error (i.e., the Standard Error)
- there is a level of general
acceptance in that particular discipline's community
This course is designed to assist
the attorney with preparing expert witnesses, who must deliver testimony
on the scope and foundation of compensation and benefits expert witness
testimony regarding area demographics and affirmative action. |
