What Is the Daubert Standard and How Does It Apply to Expert Witnesses in New York?

The Following People Contributed to This Page

Cindy Cordova

Legal Writer at The Orlow Firm | Website

Cindy Cordova is a seasoned legal writer with over seven years of experience crafting clear, informative, and professional content for law firm websites. With a B.A. in English from Trinity Christian College, she combines her strong writing background with a deep understanding of legal topics to help firms connect with their clients through trustworthy and accessible content.

Read More

Fact Checked

Legally Reviewed

• July 8, 2025

What Is the Daubert Standard and Why Does It Matter in NYC Courts?

Quick Answer:

The Daubert Standard is a rule used by U.S. courts to determine the admissibility of expert witness testimony. It requires judges to act as “gatekeepers,” assessing whether the expert’s testimony is relevant and reliable before allowing it to be presented to the jury. This standard was established in the 1993 Supreme Court case Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

Here’s a more detailed explanation of the Daubert Standard:

• Reliability: The judge must rigorously evaluate whether the expert’s underlying methods, principles, and reasoning are scientifically valid and reliable. This ensures the testimony is grounded in sound methodology, not speculation.
• Relevance: The expert testimony must be directly relevant to the specific facts of the case. It needs to genuinely assist the judge or jury in understanding the evidence or determining a fact that is in dispute.
• Judge as Gatekeeper: The judge holds the responsibility of acting as a “gatekeeper,” ensuring that any expert testimony presented to the court is based on sound scientific principles, reliable data, and appropriate methodology, rather than on unsubstantiated opinions or unreliable methods.
• Factors for Assessing Reliability: While not a definitive checklist, courts often consider several factors when evaluating an expert’s testimony for reliability:
  • Testability: Whether the expert’s theory or technique can be (and has been) tested.
  • Peer review and publication: Whether the expert’s work has been subjected to peer review and published in scientific literature.
  • Known or potential error rate: The known or potential error rate of the expert’s methods or techniques.
  • General acceptance: Whether the expert’s methodology is generally accepted within the relevant scientific community.
  • Application to the facts: Whether the expert has reliably applied their methods to the specific facts of the case at hand.
• Expansion of Daubert: The Daubert standard’s scope was later expanded by the Supreme Court in Kumho Tire Co. v. Carmichael (1999). This expansion clarified that the standard applies not only to scientific testimony but also to expert testimony based on “technical or other specialized knowledge,” encompassing a broader range of expert fields.

In essence, the Daubert Standard ensures that expert testimony presented to the court is grounded in reliable science and relevant to the case, preventing juries from being misled by unreliable or subjective opinions. If you were injured in an accident and expert testimony might play a role in your case, reach out to The Orlow Firm at (646) 647-3398. Our personal injury attorneys handle a wide range of injury cases throughout NYC and can explain how rules like the Daubert standard could affect your claim.

How Does the Daubert Standard Affect Expert Witnesses in New York?

The Daubert standard plays a big role in how expert witnesses are used in New York courts, especially in personal injury cases. Expert witnesses are people with special knowledge who help explain complex topics, like medical conditions or accident mechanics. Under the Daubert standard, not just anyone can be called an expert. Their testimony must meet certain rules to be accepted in court.

So how does this affect expert witnesses in New York? It means that just having experience or a degree is not always enough. The court must look at whether the expert’s methods and opinions are based on reliable science or technical facts. If the judge thinks the expert’s testimony isn’t trustworthy or helpful, the judge can keep it out of the trial.

Here are some ways this standard affects expert witnesses in NYC courts:

• Stricter review of expert opinions: The judge acts as a gatekeeper. They make sure the expert’s opinion is not based on guesses or untested ideas.
• Testimony must be based on scientific or technical methods: The expert must use methods that other professionals in their field accept as valid.
• Experts may be challenged before trial: The court might hold a hearing to decide if the expert’s testimony meets the Daubert standard before allowing the jury to hear it.
• Not all expert witnesses are accepted: Even if someone has years of experience, they might still be kept off the witness stand if their process doesn’t meet the rules.

Let’s say your personal injury case involves a car accident, and your lawyer hires a crash reconstructionist to explain how the accident happened. That expert will need to use widely accepted methods to analyze the crash. If they rely only on personal instincts without scientific support, the court might reject their opinion.

This standard is important because expert testimony can strongly influence how a jury sees a case. The Daubert standard helps ensure that juries hear only reliable opinions based on proper methods, not just theories that sound impressive.

If you have questions about how expert witnesses might affect your personal injury case in New York City, The Orlow Firm can help. Call us at (646) 647-3398 for a free consultation.

What Criteria Must Expert Testimony Meet Under the Daubert Standard?

Under the Daubert Standard, expert testimony must meet certain criteria before it can be accepted by the court. This rule helps judges decide if an expert witness is reliable and if their opinion is based on sound science or knowledge. In New York, especially in personal injury cases, meeting these standards is critical for presenting a strong case that may involve medical, scientific, or technical facts.

To be allowed in court under the Daubert Standard, expert testimony must meet the following main criteria:

• The testimony must be based on scientific, technical, or specialized knowledge that will help the judge or jury understand the facts of the case.
• The expert’s opinion must be based on reliable methods and principles . That means the expert used tools or techniques that are accepted in their field.
• The methods used must have been properly applied to the case . The expert can’t just rely on general knowledge—they must show how the methods connect to the specific facts of the case.

To decide whether the testimony meets these standards, judges may look at several key factors:

1. Testing: Has the method or theory been tested in a real, scientific way?
2. Peer Review and Publication: Has the method or idea been reviewed by other experts and published in professional journals?
3. Error Rate: Is there a known rate of error for the method the expert used, and is it considered acceptable?
4. Standards and Controls: Are there standards in place to ensure the method is used correctly?
5. General Acceptance: Is the method or theory widely accepted in the expert’s field?

Keep in mind, not all of these factors have to be met for the testimony to be allowed, but the judge uses them as a guide. In New York City courtrooms, the Daubert Standard can apply in both state and federal cases, depending on the type of court the case is heard in.

For example, say you were hurt in a car accident in Manhattan, and your case involves a medical expert explaining long-term back injuries. The court would want to make sure the expert’s testimony is not just opinion, but backed by medical science—like MRI results, peer-reviewed studies, and accepted treatment guidelines.

The goal of this standard is to keep “junk science” or unreliable opinions out of the courtroom. It helps make sure that expert witnesses truly bring helpful, accurate information that supports fair outcomes for injury victims in New York.

Is the Daubert Standard the Same in State and Federal New York Courts?

The Daubert standard is used differently in federal and state courts in New York. While federal courts fully follow the Daubert standard, New York state courts do not apply it the same way. This difference is important if your case involves expert witnesses, like doctors or accident reconstruction specialists.

In federal courts, the Daubert standard is the rule. Judges act as “gatekeepers,” which means they must decide whether expert testimony is reliable and based on sound science before it can be shown to a jury. This rule comes from a U.S. Supreme Court case called Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals.

In New York state courts, things work a bit differently. While New York courts do consider whether expert testimony is trustworthy, they do not fully follow the federal Daubert rules. Instead, they use what’s known as the Frye standard. The Frye standard asks whether the expert’s method is generally accepted by the scientific community. It focuses more on tradition and general agreement in the field, rather than how testable or peer-reviewed the methods are.

Here are the key differences between the two standards:

• Daubert (Federal Court): Judges examine the science behind the expert’s opinion. The method must be testable, peer-reviewed, have a known error rate, and be generally accepted.
• Frye (New York State Court): Judges look at whether the method is widely accepted in its field. They usually do not question the science as deeply.

This difference can affect how personal injury cases are handled in New York City. For example, if your case is in federal court—such as when the damages are high or the parties are from different states—the Daubert standard might apply. But if your case stays in New York state court, it will likely follow the Frye test instead.

Because expert testimony can play a big role in serious injury cases, choosing the right court and understanding which rules apply can make a difference in how your case is decided.

If you have questions about whether your case may go to state or federal court, or how expert witnesses might affect your claim, you can call The Orlow Firm at (646) 647-3398 to discuss options based on your situation.

How Do Judges Use the Daubert Standard to Evaluate Experts?

Judges in New York use the Daubert standard to decide whether an expert witness may testify in court. This standard helps ensure that the expert’s opinion is based on reliable and relevant science, not just personal beliefs or untested ideas. It’s especially important in personal injury cases where expert testimony can affect the final outcome.

When using the Daubert standard, a judge acts as a “gatekeeper.” This means the judge reviews the expert’s testimony before it’s shown to a jury. The goal is to make sure the expert’s information is both trustworthy and useful for the case.

Under the Daubert standard, judges often ask the following key questions:

• Has the expert’s method been tested? The court checks if the expert’s theory or technique has been tested in real situations, not just in theory.
• Has the method been peer-reviewed? Judges look at whether other experts in the same field have reviewed and approved the method in published studies or journals.
• What is the error rate associated with the method? The judge considers the chance of mistakes in the expert’s process and whether that rate is acceptable.
• Are there standards for the method? Judges see if there are rules that guide how the expert’s method should be used and whether the expert followed them.
• Is the method generally accepted in the expert’s field? Acceptance by the larger scientific or professional community helps show the method is valid.

Once these questions are reviewed, the judge decides whether the expert will be allowed to speak in court. If the expert’s opinions are unreliable or not based on science, the judge can exclude them from testifying. This helps keep out misleading or unsupported testimony.

For example, in a personal injury lawsuit in New York City, a doctor might be called to testify about how an accident caused a long-term back injury. The judge will use the Daubert standard to decide if the doctor’s opinion is based on solid medical science—not just personal judgment.

Judges in federal cases are required to apply the Daubert standard. In New York State courts, the rules are a bit more complex. While state courts traditionally followed a different standard, many now consider Daubert-like factors, especially in personal injury and medical cases. Judges have the power to weigh expert testimony carefully, even outside the federal system.

In the end, how a judge applies the Daubert standard can have a major impact on your case. If an expert’s testimony is not allowed, it could weaken your claim or defense. This is why it’s important to work with a legal team that understands how the Daubert standard works in New York City courts.

Why Is the Daubert Standard Important in Personal Injury Cases?

The Daubert Standard plays a key role in personal injury cases, especially when expert witnesses are involved. Expert witnesses often provide important opinions in these cases. For example, they may explain how an injury happened, how serious it is, or whether a product was defective. But not all expert opinions are treated the same in court. The Daubert Standard helps judges decide whether an expert’s opinion is reliable enough to be presented to a jury.

In simple terms, the Daubert Standard sets rules for which expert testimony can be used in a case. It helps keep junk science or untested opinions out of the courtroom. In a personal injury lawsuit, this can affect the outcome of the case.

Here’s why the Daubert Standard matters in personal injury claims:

• It protects fairness: Both sides in a case should rely on expert opinions that are based on real science or professional knowledge. The Daubert Standard ensures only sound, tested methods are used by experts in court.
• It influences how damages are decided: In a case where the injury’s cause or severity is in question, expert testimony could be the deciding factor. If an expert is not allowed to testify, that could seriously hurt one side’s case.
• It helps filter out weak claims: If an expert uses outdated or unreliable methods, their opinions may not meet the Daubert test. This helps prevent misleading or exaggerated claims from reaching a jury.
• It affects settlements: Insurance companies and defense lawyers often look at which expert witnesses will be allowed. A strong, admissible expert opinion under the Daubert Standard may encourage the other side to settle rather than risk trial.

For example, imagine a slip and fall case in a Bronx grocery store. The injured person claims the store’s floor caused them to fall and suffer a serious back injury. To prove this, they hire a medical expert to explain the injury and a safety expert to describe how the floor was dangerous. If the defense challenges these experts under the Daubert Standard and wins, most of their testimony may be thrown out. That means the injured person might not have enough proof to continue the case.

On the other hand, if the experts’ methods and opinions meet the Daubert rules, their testimony can help build a solid case for compensation.

In short, the Daubert Standard is important in personal injury cases because it sets quality standards for expert evidence. In New York City courts, judges use this standard to make sure only reliable and helpful expert opinions make it in front of a jury. This can strongly affect whether your injury case succeeds or fails.

What Are Common Challenges to Expert Witnesses Using the Daubert Standard?

Expert witnesses often play a key role in personal injury cases. They help explain complex information like medical conditions, accident reconstructions, or product malfunctions. But before they can testify in New York courts, their opinions must meet the Daubert standard. This means their methods and conclusions need to be reliable and based on sound science. Meeting this standard can bring several challenges.

Here are some of the most common issues expert witnesses may face:

• Lack of Scientific Support: An expert’s opinion must come from accepted research, testing, or data. If their methods are not widely accepted in their field, or if their conclusions seem too personal or untested, a judge might not allow their testimony.
• Poor Qualifications: Even if someone seems knowledgeable, the court must see that they have proper training, experience, or education in the topic they’re discussing. If an expert is seen as underqualified, their input may be rejected.
• Biased Opinions: Courts in New York look carefully at whether an expert has a neutral point of view. If the expert appears too connected to the party who hired them—such as being a frequent paid witness—their credibility may be questioned.
• Unreliable Methods: Experts must use methods that others in their field would recognize or approve. If their process cannot be tested, checked by peers, or repeated, it will likely not meet the Daubert standard.
• Poor Communication: Even reliable experts can struggle if they can’t clearly explain their findings. In New York City courts, judges and juries often need information presented in simple, clear language. Confusing or technical testimony may be rejected or misunderstood.

For example, imagine a personal injury case in Brooklyn where a doctor is asked to testify about a brain injury caused by a fall. If the doctor uses a new medical theory that hasn’t been widely tested or written about, the judge may rule that their findings don’t meet the Daubert standard—even if the doctor strongly believes in them.

New York courts apply the Daubert test to protect both sides in a case. The goal is to make sure the jury only hears expert opinions that are reliable, relevant, and fair. But that also means attorneys must carefully choose and prepare their expert witnesses.

If you’re involved in a personal injury case in New York City, it’s important to understand how expert testimony can affect the outcome. For more guidance on how these rules may impact your case, contact The Orlow Firm at (646) 647-3398 for a free and confidential consultation.

How Can the Daubert Standard Impact Your NYC Injury Case Outcome?

The Daubert standard can play a major role in how your personal injury case is decided in New York City. This standard affects whether expert witnesses can testify in court. In many personal injury cases—like car accidents, slip and falls, or medical malpractice—experts are often needed to explain complex issues to the jury. If their testimony is allowed or denied under the Daubert standard, it can directly impact your case’s outcome.

Here’s how the Daubert standard can affect your NYC injury claim:

• Expert testimony may be excluded: If the court decides that an expert’s opinion doesn’t meet the Daubert criteria, that expert may not be allowed to testify. This can weaken your case if the expert was going to explain how the accident happened or the extent of your injuries.
• The jury may never hear key evidence: In a personal injury case, an expert might explain how a product failed or how a medical error harmed you. Without that expert, the jury might not hear critical information that supports your claim.
• Judges can dismiss claims early: If your claim relies heavily on expert opinions that don’t meet the Daubert standard, the judge may dismiss parts of your case, or even the entire case, before it reaches trial.
• The other side may challenge your witnesses: Defense attorneys often use the Daubert standard to try to exclude your expert. If successful, this could make it harder for your side to prove things like the seriousness of your injury or who was at fault.

Let’s look at an example: Imagine you’re injured in a car accident in Brooklyn, and your attorney brings in a medical expert to show how the crash caused your long-term back pain. If the court finds the expert’s methods unreliable under the Daubert standard, their testimony might be thrown out. Without that testimony, the jury may not fully understand how serious your injury is, which could lower your compensation.

This is why it’s important that your legal team chooses experts who meet the Daubert standard. They need to use methods that are widely accepted in their field. Their opinions must be based on facts and not just personal beliefs.

Injury cases in NYC often rely on experts for:

• Medical opinions about injury causes and long-term effects
• Accident reconstruction to explain how an event took place
• Economic analysis to show lost wages or future earnings loss

All of these opinions must meet the Daubert standard in order to be used in court. If they do, your case stands on stronger legal ground. If they don’t, it can be much harder to win fair compensation.

If you’re dealing with a personal injury case in New York City and have questions about expert witnesses or the Daubert standard, don’t wait. Contact The Orlow Firm at (646) 647-3398 to speak with someone who can help guide you through the process.

Frequently Asked Questions About the Daubert Standard in New York

• What is the Daubert standard? The Daubert standard is a legal rule used by courts to decide if an expert witness’s testimony is reliable and valid. It helps judges keep out opinions that are not based on good science or solid methods.
• How does the Daubert standard work in New York? New York state courts use a similar rule called the Frye standard, but federal courts in New York apply the Daubert standard. In some cases, state courts may consider Daubert-like factors, especially if the science is new or complex. If your injury case is in federal court, Daubert will likely apply.
• What counts as an “expert witness” under Daubert? An expert witness is someone with special knowledge, skill, or training who can help explain facts in a case. This can include doctors, engineers, accident reconstruction experts, and more. Under the Daubert standard, they must use methods that are tested, accepted, and based on real science or professional standards.
• Why does the Daubert standard matter in a personal injury case? Expert witnesses often play a big role in proving injury cases. They can help show how an accident caused your injuries or how much care you’ll need in the future. If an expert’s testimony gets rejected under the Daubert standard, it can weaken your case. That’s why choosing qualified, reliable experts is important.
• Who decides if an expert meets the Daubert standard? The judge decides if an expert’s opinions are allowed. This is called acting as a “gatekeeper.” A judge will review several factors, including whether the expert’s method is widely accepted and whether it has been tested and reviewed by others.
• What are some reasons a judge might reject expert testimony under Daubert? A judge may exclude testimony if:
  • The expert’s methods are not tested.
  • The expert relies too much on guesswork or personal opinion.
  • The science is not generally accepted in the expert’s field.
  • The expert did not apply the method properly to the facts of the case.
• Can a case be dismissed because of Daubert issues? Yes, it can happen. If expert testimony is a key part of your case and the judge says it doesn’t meet the Daubert standard, it may be hard or impossible to prove your claim. That’s why having experienced legal support matters.
• Does the Daubert standard apply in NYC criminal cases? In general, Daubert applies more often in federal criminal courts than in New York state courts. In state criminal cases, judges still look at whether expert evidence is reliable, but they may follow different rules like the Frye standard.
• What should I do if I think Daubert might affect my injury case? If your case depends on expert opinions, it’s important to get legal help early. A personal injury lawyer can make sure the expert witnesses meet the proper standards and help protect your case from being harmed by a Daubert hearing.

If you have more questions about how the Daubert standard may apply to your case in New York City, don’t wait to get help. Contact The Orlow Firm at (646) 647-3398 to speak directly with our team about your situation.

Contact The Orlow Firm for a Free Consultation About Your Case

Understanding how the Daubert standard could affect your personal injury case in New York is important—but it’s not always easy. The rules around expert witnesses can be confusing, and mistakes could harm your case. That’s why speaking with a knowledgeable personal injury attorney can make a real difference.

At The Orlow Firm, we offer free consultations to help you understand your rights and legal options. If your case involves expert testimony—such as a doctor, accident reconstructionist, or engineer—the Daubert standard may come into play. We can review whether the expert’s opinion is likely to be accepted in court based on the standards that judges use.

During your consultation, we will:

• Listen to the details of your case so we can fully understand what happened and how it has affected you.
• Explain the legal process in plain language, including how the Daubert standard might affect your expert witnesses.
• Answer your questions clearly and honestly, without pressure or confusing legal jargon.
• Help you decide next steps based on your unique situation and the potential strengths or challenges of your case.

If you’re concerned about whether an expert’s testimony will hold up in court, or if you’re unsure whether the Daubert standard will matter in your case, we’re here to help. Certain types of personal injury claims—like medical malpractice, defective products, or complex car crashes—often rely on expert witnesses. A judge in New York will use the Daubert standard to decide if that expert is reliable and relevant to your case.

Call The Orlow Firm at (646) 647-3398 today to schedule your free consultation. Our experienced attorneys serve clients across all five boroughs of New York City and are ready to support you every step of the way.

The Following People Contributed to This Page

Cindy Cordova

Legal Writer at The Orlow Firm | Website

Cindy Cordova is a seasoned legal writer with over seven years of experience crafting clear, informative, and professional content for law firm websites. With a B.A. in English from Trinity Christian College, she combines her strong writing background with a deep understanding of legal topics to help firms connect with their clients through trustworthy and accessible content.

Read More