Florida Frye Standard Reaffirmed
Florida
State Courts Reaffirms Frye Standard for Admissibility of Expert Testimony
In a decision by the Florida Supreme Court in
reversing the Fourth District Court of Appeals’ decision in DeLisle v. Crane
Co., the Frye standard for
admissibility of expert testimony has been reaffirmed in Florida state courts. The Court stated, “Frye relied on the
scientific community to determine reliability whereas Daubert relied on the
scientific savvy of trial judges to determine the significance of the
methodology used…” DeLisle v. Crane Co.,
2018 Fla. LEXIS 1883, *1. Historically, the Frye standard was followed in Florida
state courts until 2013, when the Daubert
standard was implemented and amended into the Florida Rules of Evidence Code. Daubert
v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993). The Daubert
standard provided for judges’ discretion to determine the reliability of expert
testimony through detailed analysis of facts, data, principles, and methods primarily
used in expert’s opinion. While Daubert provided for a greater
reliability standard, it also created limitations in meeting causation. Not to mention, additional time and expense
imposed on court trials. With the Frye standard requiring only a “generally
accepted” principle of scientific community to admit expert testimony, it promotes
more use in court proceedings. Frye v. United States, 293 F. 1013 (D.C.
Cir. 1923).
The Frye standard is back in Florida.
When Richard DeLisle developed mesothelioma, a personal injury action ensued
against manufactures, cigarettes and suppliers of asbestos-containing devices. Crane
Co. v. DeLisle, 206 So. 3d 94 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016). At trial, the Circuit Court of Broward County
granted judgment on jury verdict in favor of DeLisle after three opinions by expert witnesses were
admitted. On appeal, the Fourth District
Court of Appeals found the trial court improperly applied the Daubert
standard. DeLisle appealed to the Florida Supreme Court on the matter of
Daubert (Florida Statute 90.702) claiming it unconstitutional. The Florida Supreme Court found Florida
Statute 90.702 was more procedural when amended in 2013. The Court further stated, as the statute
stood, it created a conflict on the courts ability to rule, making the amended
statute unconstitutional.
As such, the DeLisle decision has allowed Florida state courts to favor the Frye
standard once again, as to evidence admissibility of expert testimony. However, the Daubert standard will continue
to be applied in federal courts.
Visit us:
Follow us:
The hiring of a lawyer is an
important decision that should not be based solely upon advertisements. Before
you decide, ask us to send you free written information about our
qualifications and experience. Additionally, the information above is not
intended to be legal advice. Please consult with an experienced lawyer if you
have a specific issue or dispute.
Office locations: 2400 E.
Commercial Boulevard, Suite 400, Fort Lauderdale, FL 33308
2901 Q. Street, NW Suite 2,
Washington, D.C. 20007
Comments
Post a Comment