Daubert Standard

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

• Haddad v. Rav Bahamas, Ltd.
  589 F. Supp. 2d 1302· S.D. Fla.· 2008-11-12 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the plaintiff's expert's testimony was inadmissible because it was based on an irrelevant time frame and failed to address the parties' contractual remedy provisions, rendering it unhelpful to the jury.
• Parrish v. Freightliner, LLC
  471 F. Supp. 2d 1262· M.D. Fla.· 2006-05-03 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the plaintiff's failure to timely supplement discovery responses and her drastic change in liability theory, without substantial justification or harmlessness to the defendant, warranted striking her expert and granting summary judgment.
• Colin Orpe v. Carnival Corp. & Gary Ferris
  909 So. 2d 929· Fla. 3d DCA· 2005-08-03 ·cited 2×
  Colin Orpe appeals a negligence judgment after the trial court excluded his sole liability expert's testimony regarding ship safety measures. The appellate court reversed, holding that the expert was qualified and the subject matter was appropriate for expert testimony, and that
• Gulfstream Park Racing Ass'n, Inc. v. Tampa Bay Downs, Inc.
  294 F. Supp. 2d 1291· M.D. Fla.· 2003-11-07 ·cited 2×
  The court held that Gulfstream's exclusive dissemination agreements were unenforceable under Florida law and not preempted by federal law, thus granting summary judgment for TBD on most claims and counterclaims.
• Allapattah Servs., Inc. v. Exxon Corp.
  61 F. Supp. 2d 1335· S.D. Fla.· 1999-07-28 ·cited 2×
  The court denied motions to exclude expert testimony, finding both experts qualified and their methodologies sufficiently reliable for the jury to consider.
• Olvera v. State
  641 So. 2d 120· Fla. 5th DCA· 1994-05-31 ·cited 2×
• Walls v. Armour Pharm. Co.
  832 F. Supp. 1467· M.D. Fla.· 1993-07-19 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the products liability statute of limitation, not the negligence statute, applied to the failure-to-warn claim, and the action was timely filed.
• Sedgwick Claims Mgmt. Servs. v. Thompson
  419 So. 3d 1104· Fla. 1st DCA· 2025-09-03 ·cited 1×
  Section 440.25(4)(d), Florida Statutes (2020), statutorily precludes Daubert challenges to expert medical advisor reports and opinions by mandating that such reports and testimony "shall be admitted into evidence" in workers' compensation proceedings, thereby eliminating any thre
• Sunbelt Rentals, Inc. v. Burns
  402 So. 3d 1178· Fla. 3d DCA· 2025-02-12 ·cited 1×
  Expert testimony from Dr. Weaver and Galatsis was admissible under Daubert because each expert provided a fact-based chain of reasoning applying reliable principles and methods to the facts of the case, including detailed review of evidence, citation to scientific studies and ind
• Petro Welt Trading Ges.m.b.h v. Brinkmann
  Fla. 6th DCA· 2024-11-08 ·cited 1×
  A trial court violates due process when it grants summary judgment on grounds of personal jurisdiction or forum non conveniens that were not raised by the moving party or in the relevant pleadings. A trial court improperly weighs evidence on summary judgment when it discounts exp
• Fed. Trade Comm'n v. Simple Health Plans, LLC
  2012 WL 3150054· S.D. Fla.· 2024-02-07 ·cited 1×
  The court granted the FTC's motion for summary judgment, finding that the defendants engaged in a classic bait and switch scheme by selling limited indemnity or discount plans while misrepresenting them as comprehensive health insurance compliant with the ACA.
• Fertil v. Univ. of Miami
  388 So. 3d 174· Fla. 3d DCA· 2023-12-13 ·cited 1×
  A causation expert's opinion in a medical malpractice case is unreliable under Daubert when the expert fails to consider the plaintiff's substantial medical history of chronic hypertension and bases critical assumptions—including whether the plaintiff would have sought and compli
• Holland v. Holland
  360 So. 3d 1176· Fla. 5th DCA· 2023-04-06 ·cited 1×
  The trial court abused its discretion in excluding treating physician Dr. Tran's disability opinion testimony under Daubert standards in a bench trial, where the alleged deficiencies could have been addressed through cross-examination. The imputation of income to the former spous
• Molbogot v. MarineMax E., Inc.
  S.D. Fla.· 2022-07-11 ·cited 1×
  Molbogot purchased a new boat from MarineMax after a salesman allegedly misrepresented and concealed defects in the generator and trim tabs, including not disclosing that the generator needed a controller replacement before the sale. The court denied both parties' cross-motions f
• Philip Morris USA Inc. v. Naugle
  337 So. 3d 13· Fla. 4th DCA· 2022-03-02 ·cited 1×
  The appellate court reversed a trial court's attorney's fees award, finding that the trial court erred by admitting unreliable expert testimony. The court held that expert testimony on attorney's fees is subject to Daubert standards and that the expert's testimony lacked a reliab
• Harris v. Wingo
  M.D. Fla.· 2021-10-29 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the law of the case doctrine did not preclude litigation of liability, as the Eleventh Circuit's prior ruling only addressed qualified immunity based on undisputed facts, and new evidence could be presented at trial. The court also denied Daubert motions regar
• United Auto. Ins. Co. v. Cent. Therapy Ctr., Inc.
  325 So. 3d 252· Fla. 3d DCA· 2021-07-28 ·cited 1×
  United Automobile Insurance Company appeals a summary judgment order favoring Central Therapy Center in a breach of contract dispute over personal injury protection (PIP) benefits. The central dispute concerns whether Central Therapy's charges were reasonable and whether the trea
• Lajayvian D. Daniels v. State
  312 So. 3d 926· Fla. 4th DCA· 2021-02-24 ·cited 1×
  The trial court properly admitted expert testimony regarding DNA analysis performed by the TrueAllele probabilistic genotyping software under the Daubert standard, despite the lack of internal validation of the software using test data generated by the investigating lab (PBSO). T
• Walker v. State
  308 So. 3d 193· Fla. 4th DCA· 2020-12-09 ·cited 1×
  An expert witness may reliably testify about the output of cell site mapping software without knowledge of the underlying algorithm or computer programming, provided the witness has sufficient training, experience, and familiarity with the tool and has verified its accuracy throu
• Johnson v. State
  254 So. 3d 617· Fla. 1st DCA· 2018-08-24 ·cited 1×
  In this collateral appeal addressing ineffective assistance of counsel, the court held that trial counsel was not constitutionally deficient for failing to object to a K-9 officer's lay opinion testimony about a trained dog's ability to detect human odors from suspects fleeing fr
• Hawthorne v. State
  248 So. 3d 1261· Fla. 1st DCA· 2018-06-13 ·cited 1×
  The trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting Dr. Goldberger's expert testimony regarding the consistency of the accident facts with methamphetamine impairment, which was based on reliable principles and methods generally accepted in forensic toxicology. The court als
• Collar v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. & Philip Morris USA, Inc.
  222 So. 3d 581· Fla. 4th DCA· 2017-07-05 ·cited 1×
  In this Engle progeny tobacco case, the Florida Court of Appeal reversed a jury verdict for tobacco defendants where the trial court made inconsistent evidentiary rulings: excluding the plaintiff's treating pulmonologist's expert opinion on addiction but allowing him to testify a
• United States v. Fedida
  1991 WL 45339· M.D. Fla.· 2013-05-01 ·cited 1×
  The Court held that the Controlled Substance Analogue Enforcement Act of 1986 is not unconstitutionally vague as applied to UR-144 and XLR-11, and the indictment is sufficient on its face.
• United States v. Owens
  682 F.3d 1358· 11th Cir.· 2012-06-08 ·cited 1×
  The dissenting opinion argues that appellate courts should review the exclusion of expert testimony regarding eyewitness identification reliability for abuse of discretion. Current precedent, which bars such review, is outdated and conflicts with the majority of federal circuits
• Harrell v. Florida Bar
  490 F. Supp. 2d 381· M.D. Fla.· 2011-09-30 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the Florida Bar Rules prohibiting "quality of legal services" statements and "promises results" are not unconstitutionally vague, as they provide sufficient notice and enforcement standards for lawyers of ordinary intelligence.
• Medina v. Louisville Ladder, Inc.
  496 F. Supp. 2d 1324· M.D. Fla.· 2007-06-15 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the expert testimony regarding the necessity of Spanish warnings and instructions was inadmissible under Daubert, and granted summary judgment for the defendants due to lack of evidence.
• Dillon v. Axxsys Int'l, Inc.
  385 F. Supp. 2d 1307· M.D. Fla.· 2005-08-16 ·cited 1×
  The court held that an officer is not liable under Section 517.211(2) for selling unregistered securities unless they personally participated or aided in making the sale, and mere involvement in general corporate business is insufficient.
• Williams v. Michelin N. Am., Inc.
  381 F. Supp. 2d 1351· M.D. Fla.· 2005-08-09 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the expert's opinions regarding tire countermeasures and expiry warnings were inadmissible because they lacked the necessary scientific reliability and relevance under the Daubert standard.
• Abramson v. Walt Disney World Co.
  370 F. Supp. 2d 1221· M.D. Fla.· 2005-05-27 ·cited 1×
  The court held that expert testimony was unnecessary because the condition at issue was within the common experience and understanding of jurors.
• Dow Chem. Co. v. Mee Indus.
  264 F. Supp. 2d 1018· M.D. Fla.· 2002-09-19 ·cited 1×
  The court found that the defendants failed to prove the patents were invalid due to the on-sale bar or obviousness, and that Dow failed to establish damages.
• Culley v. Trak Microwave Corp.
  117 F. Supp. 2d 1317· M.D. Fla.· 2000-01-18 ·cited 1×
  Summary judgment is granted for the defendant because the plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case of age discrimination or retaliation, and the defendant provided legitimate, non-discriminatory reasons for the termination.
• Resolution Tr. Corp. v. Stroock & Stroock & Lavan
  853 F. Supp. 1422· S.D. Fla.· 1994-05-25 ·cited 1×
  Summary judgment is granted because the plaintiff's damage theories, both for junk bond investments and the sub debt offering, are based on speculation and lack sufficient proof of causation and calculable damages under Florida law.
• Chikovsky v. Ortho Pharm. Corp.
  832 F. Supp. 341· S.D. Fla.· 1993-09-23 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the plaintiffs' expert testimony was inadmissible under Daubert, thus they could not establish causation, entitling the defendant to summary judgment.
• JOY v. Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc.
  999 F.2d 549· D.C. Cir.· 1993-07-27 ·cited 1×
  The court held that evidence of other SAG failures was admissible and jury instructions on product liability were proper, but reversed a damages award for loss of consortium and certified a question regarding the District of Columbia's liability for the rescue effort.
• Stout v. Cassity
  Fla. 2d DCA· 2026-08-28
  A trial court abuses its discretion by denying a motion for post-verdict juror interview when the moving party establishes that a juror concealed material information during voir dire, the information is relevant to jury service, and the concealment was not attributable to the mo
• De Cardena v. White Pine Ins. Co.
  Fla. 3d DCA· 2026-03-31
  A trial court abuses its discretion when it excludes expert testimony based solely on an affidavit and oral argument without a sufficient analysis of the Daubert factors under Florida Statute section 90.702, and when it substitutes its judgment for that of the jury by weighing ev
• Andino
  Del. Super. Ct.· 2026-02-25
  In this wrongful death case arising from a tragic 2020 aerial lift accident that killed two workers, the Delaware Superior Court denied summary judgment motions filed by Nexius Solutions and Myndco, finding genuine disputes of material fact regarding whether these defendants owed
• United States v. Sefan Eberhard Zappey
  11th Cir.· 2026-01-21
  Stefan Eberhard Zappey, a former DOD elementary school teacher, was convicted of sexually abusing four students at Patch Elementary School in Germany between 2006-2010. On appeal, Zappey challenged the trial court's exclusion of expert testimony on memory reliability, arguing it
• Greenwich Ins. Co. v. Fernandez
  S.D. Fla.· 2026-01-17
  The court held that expert testimony offering legal conclusions on insurance policy interpretation or the legal consequences of parties' conduct is inadmissible under the Daubert standard, but testimony on industry standards may be admissible to assist the trier of fact.
• Walgreens Co. v. Chaux
  Fla. 3d DCA· 2026-01-14
  Walgreens appeals a jury verdict awarding $5.5 million to Maria Victoria Chaux for injuries suffered in a slip-and-fall at a Walgreens store. The appellate court reversed and remanded for a new trial, finding that the trial court improperly imposed a burden-shifting spoliation sa
• Walgreens Co. v. Chaux
  Fla. 3d DCA· 2026-01-14
  The trial court erred in imposing a burden-shifting spoliation sanction instruction without proper notice after both parties rested, violating due process and amounting to a directed verdict on an element of Chaux's claim. The trial court abused its discretion in excluding Dr. Go
• v. I.D. No. 2311012713 Jeremiah Handy
  Del. Super. Ct.· 2026-01-07
  In this criminal case, defendant Jeremiah Handy, charged with Murder First Degree and related felonies stemming from a vehicular collision that killed Gabriel Dorman, sought dismissal of the indictment for prosecutorial misconduct, release of the grand jury transcript, and exclus
• Orlando Health, Inc. v. HKS Architects, Inc.
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-12-17
  The court held that a defendant asserting affirmative defenses in a breach of contract action must present evidence to support them, and legally insufficient defenses are invalid.
• Diaz v. EDI Korta LLC
  S.D. Fla.· 2025-12-10
  The court granted Plaintiffs' motion to exclude Defendants' expert's non-damages opinions because they were untimely affirmative opinions disguised as rebuttal, and Defendants failed to respond to the motion. The court also found that the untimely disclosure of Plaintiffs' handwr
• Aroma360 LLC v. Scentiment, LLC
  S.D. Fla.· 2025-12-04
  The court held that challenges to the factual basis or methodology of expert testimony generally go to the weight of the evidence, not its admissibility, but expert testimony offering legal conclusions is inadmissible.
• Gen. Zantac Litig. In re: Zantac (Ranitidine Litig. C.A. No.: N22C-09-101 ZAN
  Del. Super. Ct.· 2025-12-01
  The Court denied Plaintiffs' motion to modify the case management order to supplement expert disclosures. The Delaware Supreme Court's decision did not alter existing Daubert or general causation standards, and Plaintiffs' experts failed to meet these well-settled requirements. A
• v. I.D. No. 2109010261 Khalil Dixon
  Del. Super. Ct.· 2025-11-17
  The court granted in part and denied in part motions to suppress search warrants for Instagram accounts and AT&T records. The court denied a motion to exclude expert testimony regarding cell tower data analysis. A motion for leave to file a suppression motion out of time was gran
• de Fernandez v. Cma CGM S.A.
  S.D. Fla.· 2025-11-17
  The court adopted in part the Magistrate Judge's recommendations, striking some expert opinions for unreliability while allowing others, finding that challenges to methodology application and expert credibility are often matters for cross-examination.
• Eleazer Hernandez-Perez v. Fla. Dep't of Corr.
  S.D. Fla.· 2025-11-05
  The court denied the petition for writ of habeas corpus, finding no constitutional error in the state court's proceedings.
• Solomon v. AIG Prop. Cas. Co.
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-10-23
  The court held that the defendant's expert radiologist was qualified and used a reliable methodology to opine on causation and the relationship of injuries to the accident, and thus his testimony was admissible.