Daubert Standard

698 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• United States v. Frazier
  322 F.3d 1262· 11th Cir.· 2003-02-26 ·cited 5×
  The district court abused its discretion by excluding the testimony of the defense's forensic investigator, Robert Tressel, which would have cast doubt on the victim's allegations of sexual assault by highlighting the absence of corroborating forensic evidence. This exclusion dep
• United States v. Falcon
  245 F. Supp. 2d 1239· S.D. Fla.· 2003-02-20 ·cited 5×
  The court held that expert testimony regarding a witness's personality disorders, based on observation of testimony and review of records without personal interview or testing, is not scientifically reliable and improperly invades the jury's province to determine credibility.
• Citizens Prop. Ins. Corp. v. Noa
  58 So. 3d 336· Fla. 3d DCA· 2025-01-02 ·cited 4×
  Citizens Property Insurance Corporation appealed a trial court decision regarding expert witness testimony and jury instructions. The Third District Court of Appeal affirmed the lower court's ruling, relying on established standards for reviewing Daubert admissibility decisions a
• Walsh v. Dep't of Child. & Families
  380 So. 3d 469· Fla. 4th DCA· 2024-09-04 ·cited 4×
  The Florida Fourth District Court of Appeal held that amendments to section 63.082(6) providing a rebuttable presumption favoring a child's current prospective adoptive placement apply retroactively to pending proceedings reopened after the amendment's effective date. The court r
• Banuchi v. City of Homestead
  2007 WL 1810513· S.D. Fla.· 2022-06-08 ·cited 4×
  Plaintiff sought to exclude Defendants' expert Dr. Hough's testimony on the frequency of recovering fingerprints and DNA from firearms, the "CSI Effect," and Officer Green's location when he fired his weapon, while Defendants sought to exclude Plaintiff's rebuttal expert Dr. Knox
• Beal v. 3m Co.
  N.D. Fla.· 2022-04-28 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the expert testimony of Drs. Spankovich and Packer was admissible, as they provided reliable bases for linking the CAEv2 to the plaintiff's injuries and ruling out alternative causes. The court also ruled on the admissibility of defendants' experts' testimony,
• State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. ALL X-Ray Diagnostic Servs.
  338 So. 3d 376· Fla. 3d DCA· 2022-04-06 ·cited 4×
  The appellate court reversed a grant of summary judgment, finding that genuine issues of material fact existed regarding the reasonableness, medical necessity, and relatedness of medical charges. The court held that the insurer's deposition testimony did not constitute a waiver a
• May v. State
  326 So. 3d 188· Fla. 1st DCA· 2021-08-26 ·cited 4×
  The appellate court affirmed a defendant's fraud and racketeering convictions, finding no abuse of discretion by the trial court in excluding expert testimony and audit reports. The court emphasized the trial court's role as an evidentiary gatekeeper and the defendant's failure t
• Sunflower Condo. Ass'n, Inc. v. Everest Nat'l Ins. Co.
  2017 WL 6597980· S.D. Fla.· 2021-02-11 ·cited 4×
  The court denied the defendant's motion to reconsider its prior order on expert testimony admissibility, finding no clear error and clarifying specific testimony issues.
• Sanchez v. Miami-Dade Cnty.
  245 So. 3d 933· Fla. 3d DCA· 2018-04-25 ·cited 4×
  Christopher Sanchez sued Miami-Dade County for negligent security after being shot at a private birthday party in a county park, claiming the county failed to provide off-duty police officers as required by park regulations. The Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District, a
• Rios-Andino v. Orange Cnty.
  M.D. Fla.· 2014-08-21 ·cited 4×
  The court held that plaintiffs failed to prove that the Latino population in Orange County was sufficiently large and geographically compact to constitute a majority in a single-member district, nor that a non-Latino majority votes sufficiently as a bloc to usually defeat Latino
• Gastaldi v. Sunvest Resort Cmtys., LC
  709 F. Supp. 2d 1284· S.D. Fla.· 2010-03-22 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a continuance was not warranted because the plaintiffs had not shown sufficient diligence in preparing their damages case, having repeatedly failed to proffer admissible expert testimony on damages.
• Gastaldi v. Sunvest Resort Cmtys., LC
  709 F. Supp. 2d 1299· S.D. Fla.· 2010-03-04 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the expert's damages model was inadmissible because it failed to account for market decline and lacked a reliable methodology, potentially creating a windfall for the plaintiffs.
• Owaki v. City of Miami
  491 F. Supp. 2d 1140· S.D. Fla.· 2007-06-21 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the police officers had arguable probable cause and probable cause to arrest the plaintiff, entitling them to qualified immunity and granting summary judgment.
• State v. Armstrong
  920 So. 2d 769· Fla. 3d DCA· 2006-02-15 ·cited 4×
  The State of Florida sought a writ of certiorari to overturn a trial court's order allowing Dr. Simon Cole, a historian and sociologist, to testify that fingerprint analysis lacks scientific validation. The Florida District Court of Appeal quashed the order, holding that Cole's g
• David v. Nat'l R.R. Passenger Corp.
  801 So. 2d 223· Fla. 2d DCA· 2001-12-07 ·cited 4×
  George David sued his railroad employer under FELA for carpal tunnel syndrome caused by repetitive occupational hand use. The trial court struck all four of David's expert witnesses and granted summary judgment because David could not prove causation. The appellate court reversed
• State v. Santiago
  679 So. 2d 861· Fla. 4th DCA· 1996-09-18 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial court's order admitting polygraph test results was reviewable by certiorari and should be quashed, as Florida law generally deems polygraph tests inadmissible as a matter of law.
• Bowers v. N. Telecom, Inc.
  905 F. Supp. 1004· N.D. Fla.· 1995-09-25 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the plaintiffs' expert testimony regarding general causation was admissible under Daubert and Rule 702, denying the defendant's motion for summary judgment.
• Michael KEY, D.O. v. Angrand
  630 So. 2d 646· Fla. 3d DCA· 1994-01-11 ·cited 4×
  Dr. Key, a radiologist, appeals a medical malpractice verdict in a case where he failed to diagnose an interstitial ectopic pregnancy on ultrasound, resulting in the patient's death. The Third District reversed and remanded for a new trial, finding that expert testimony regarding
• Bass v. Fla. Dep't of Law Enf't
  627 So. 2d 1321· Fla. 3d DCA· 1993-12-14 ·cited 4×
• Apolinar "Paul" Benavides and Stella G. Benavides v. Cnty. OF Wilson & Marvin H. Baumann
  955 F.2d 968· 5th Cir.· 1992-03-05 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the plaintiffs failed to raise a fact issue regarding the county's deliberate indifference in hiring and training jail personnel, and that the wife's state-law claims were also insufficient.
• Sexton v. Bell Helmets, Inc.
  926 F.2d 331· 4th Cir.· 1991-02-05 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court erred in allowing expert testimony regarding a theoretically possible alternative design, as it did not establish that the product was defective under existing standards or consumer expectations at the time of sale. The court also found that
• Kukuruza v. Gen. Elec. Co.
  510 F.2d 1208· 1st Cir.· 1975-02-14 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the expert testimony was admissible, the jury could find a hidden defect, and the jury instructions, while imperfect, were not prejudicial.
• See State v. Floray
  Del. Super. Ct.· 2026-02-13 ·cited 3×
  In this criminal case involving child sexual abuse allegations, the Delaware Superior Court addressed whether a defense expert forensic psychologist could testify regarding the reliability of child interviews and interviewing techniques. The court granted in part the State's moti
• Young v. Panera, LLC
  2013 WL 6478425· M.D. Fla.· 2024-08-01 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the defendant's expert's testimony comparing forces in a car accident to forces in daily activities is admissible, as it is supported by generally accepted scientific studies.
• United States v. Daniels
  97 F.4th 800· 11th Cir.· 2024-03-29 ·cited 3×
  The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the district court's evidentiary rulings, finding no abuse of discretion in excluding defense expert testimony on eyewitness identification and admitting the victim's out-of-court identification.
• CID Torrez v. State
  294 So. 3d 390· Fla. 4th DCA· 2020-04-22 ·cited 3×
  Cid Lenin Torrez appeals his second-degree murder conviction for the disappearance of his wife Vilet, challenging the admissibility of cadaver dog evidence and the trial court's failure to independently assess his competency to be sentenced.
• Hayes Robertson Grp., Inc. v. Cherry
  260 So. 3d 1126· Fla. 3d DCA· 2018-12-12 ·cited 3×
  This consolidated appeal addresses two issues: whether a trial court properly excluded expert testimony regarding an employee's alleged habitual alcohol addiction in a dram shop liability case, and whether a defendant's nominal settlement proposals warranted an award of attorney'
• Maines v. FOX
  190 So. 3d 1135· Fla. 1st DCA· 2016-05-03 ·cited 3×
  In this motor vehicle accident case, the appellate court affirmed the jury verdict awarding damages to the plaintiff, finding no error in admitting testimony about the defendant's red light violation and determining that the trial court's limitation of the defense expert's causat
• Adria Perry v. City OF ST. Petersburg/City of St. Petersburg Workers' Comp. Off.
  171 So. 3d 224· Fla. 1st DCA· 2015-08-07 ·cited 3×
  In this workers' compensation case, the Florida District Court of Appeal reversed the Judge of Compensation Claims' denial of the claimant's request for medical treatment, holding that the judge erred by failing to apply the Daubert test under amended section 90.702 to evaluate t
• Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Andrx Pharms., Inc.
  343 F. Supp. 2d 1124· S.D. Fla.· 2004-06-04 ·cited 3×
  Bristol-Myers Squibb sued Andrx Pharmaceuticals for patent infringement of U.S. Patent No. 5,006,344 (the '344 patent), which claims a stable tablet formulation containing fosinopril sodium with specified excipients including a filler, binder, disintegrant, and lubricant. The cen
• Cantrell v. GAF Corp.
  999 F.2d 1007· 6th Cir.· 1993-07-26 ·cited 3×
  The court affirmed the judgment, despite reservations about prejudicial factors, due to defendant's failure to object.
• J.A.R. v. State
  374 So. 3d 25· Fla. 4th DCA· 2023-11-08 ·cited 2×
  Expert testimony regarding ShotSpotter gunshot detection technology is admissible under Daubert and Florida Statute § 90.702 when the expert demonstrates the technology is based on tested and peer-reviewed principles, has an established accuracy rate, and properly applies those p
• Davis v. Little Giant Ladder Sys., LLC
  2011 WL 833260· M.D. Fla.· 2022-08-31 ·cited 2×
  The court granted and denied various motions in limine, excluding evidence of unrelated incidents, certain recall information, and prior dismissed claims, while allowing evidence related to exemplar ladders and ANSI standards.
• Conway v. Celebrity Cruises, Inc.
  2007 WL 1752838· S.D. Fla.· 2022-04-22 ·cited 2×
  The court ruled on various motions in limine, granting some requests to exclude evidence and denying others, often deferring rulings to trial due to lack of context or prematurity.
• Peng v. Citizens Prop. Ins. Corp.
  337 So. 3d 488· Fla. 3d DCA· 2022-04-13 ·cited 2×
  Chen Peng and Xingzhi Chen appealed a summary judgment in favor of Citizens Property Insurance Corporation on their breach of contract claim for wind-related roof damage from Hurricane Irma. The trial court excluded Chen's expert engineer's testimony via a Daubert motion, finding
• United States v. Litzky
  18 F.4th 1296· 11th Cir.· 2021-11-23 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the exclusion of expert testimony regarding the defendant's intellectual disability did not violate her constitutional right to present a defense, and her below-Guidelines sentence was not substantively unreasonable.
• Lively v. Gopal S. Grandhige, m.d.
  313 So. 3d 917· Fla. 2d DCA· 2021-03-17 ·cited 2×
  The appellate court reversed a trial court's denial of a motion for a new trial in a medical malpractice case. The court found that the trial judge's oral ruling did not clearly demonstrate the application of the correct legal standard for reviewing a jury verdict against the man
• Fitzsimmons v. Biomet Orthopedics
  896 F. Supp. 2d 1339· M.D. Fla.· 2020-11-18 ·cited 2×
  Mark Fitzsimmons received a defective M2a Magnum hip implant manufactured by Biomet in 2008, which failed and required revision surgery in 2017, leading to his products liability and negligence claims consolidated into a multi-district litigation. The district court partially gra
• State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Ceda Health of Hialeah, LLC.
  300 So. 3d 748· Fla. 3d DCA· 2020-03-04 ·cited 2×
  The appellate court denied State Farm's petition for certiorari review, finding that the circuit court did not depart from the essential requirements of law when affirming a summary judgment for CEDA Health and denying a motion to disqualify a judge. The court emphasized the narr
• Poole v. State
  284 So. 3d 604· Fla. 5th DCA· 2019-10-24 ·cited 2×
  Ryan Poole appeals his conviction for human trafficking, branding, and related crimes, challenging the admission of expert testimony regarding human trafficking and sex worker subculture. The Florida District Court of Appeal affirms his conviction and specifically endorses the ad
• Amaro v. State
  272 So. 3d 853· Fla. 5th DCA· 2019-05-24 ·cited 2×
  Trial counsel was not ineffective for failing to file a Daubert motion to exclude ballistics evidence, as such evidence is well-established and admissible in Florida; and although counsel was deficient in failing to request a cautionary instruction regarding unasked juror questio
• Medina v. State
  260 So. 3d 419· Fla. 3d DCA· 2018-11-28 ·cited 2×
  The trial court properly excluded battered spouse syndrome expert testimony because the defendant failed to establish the necessary factual predicate, properly excluded drug evidence discovered two months after the crime as too remote in time and insufficiently linked to the vict
• SDI Quarry v. Gateway Ests. Park Condo. Ass'n
  249 So. 3d 1287· Fla. 1st DCA· 2018-06-22 ·cited 2×
  Repeated blasting activities constitute a continuing tort such that each blast gives rise to a new cause of action, allowing the petition to be timely filed within 180 days of the last tortious act. Competent substantial evidence supports a finding that the quarry's blasting acti
• Churchill v. State
  169 So. 3d 1260· Fla. 5th DCA· 2015-07-24 ·cited 2×
  Churchill appeals his conviction for methamphetamine manufacture and related charges after pleading no contest while reserving the right to challenge a pre-trial motion in limine ruling. The appellate court dismisses the appeal because the trial court's evidentiary ruling was not
• Conley v. State
  129 So. 3d 1120· Fla. 1st DCA· 2013-12-20 ·cited 2×
  Danny Conley appeals his adjudication as a sexually violent predator under Florida's Jimmy Ryce Act, challenging the trial court's exclusion of penile plethysmograph (PPG) test evidence. The appellate court reverses and remands because the trial court erred in excluding PPG evide
• In re Checking Account Overdraft Litigation
  220 F. Supp. 2d 414· S.D. Fla.· 2013-01-11 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a new account agreement, which did not contain an arbitration clause, superseded a prior agreement that did, thus there was no agreement to arbitrate.
• Brewington v. State
  98 So. 3d 628· Fla. 2d DCA· 2012-09-05 ·cited 2×
  Nicole Brewington was convicted of aggravated manslaughter of a child for failing to protect her three-year-old from beatings by her boyfriend. She appealed, arguing the trial court erred in excluding expert testimony on battered woman syndrome to negate the culpable negligence m
• Beauregard v. Cont'l Tire N. Am., Inc.
  695 F. Supp. 2d 1344· M.D. Fla.· 2010-03-16 ·cited 2×
  Summary judgment for the defendant is granted because the plaintiff failed to present sufficient evidence of a design or manufacturing defect in the tire at the time it left the manufacturer's control.
• Guinn v. AstraZeneca Pharms. LP
  598 F. Supp. 2d 1239· M.D. Fla.· 2009-01-30 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to establish a genuine issue of material fact regarding specific medical causation, as her expert's testimony was speculative and lacked scientific reliability under Daubert.