Learn How to Excel and Succeed as an Expert Witness
steve
About Steve Babitsky
Steven Babitsky, Esq. is the founder of SEAK, Inc., the Expert Witness Training Company. He was a personal injury trial attorney for twenty years and is the former managing partner of the firm Kistin, Babitsky, Latimer & Beitman. Steve has helped expert witnesses and their attorneys prepare for deposition in a broad range of cases, including antitrust, patent, medical malpractice, wrongful death, computer forensics, and many others. He has trained the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Federal Aviation Administration, and he has worked with numerous forensic and financial companies including Fortune 500 companies and has
worked with numerous experts to help them expand and grow their practices. Mr. Babitsky is the co-author of the texts How to Be an Effective Expert Witness at Deposition and Trial: The SEAK Guide to Testifying as an Expert Witness, How to Be a Successful Expert Witness: SEAK’s A–Z Guide to Expert Witnessing, How to Write an Expert Witness Report, and How to Market Your Expert Witness Practice Evidence-Based Practices. Attorney Babitsky is the co-developer and trainer for the “How to Be an Effective Expert Witness” seminar and has been the seminar leader since 1990 for the Annual National Expert Witness and Litigation Conference.
***The information provided on this website does not, and is not intended to, constitute legal advice; instead, all information, content, and materials available on this site are for general informational purposes only. Information on this website may not constitute the most up-to-date legal or other information.***
The state of Ohio follows the Daubert test for the admissibility of expert witness testimony. Watkins v. Affinia Group, 54 N.E.3d 174 (Ohio Ct. App. 2016). This test requires that in order for an expert’s testimony to be admissible it must meet three requirements. Id. The expert’s testimony must be: “(1) based upon sufficient [...]
By Steve Babitsky|2023-07-06T09:30:14-04:00November 30th, 2017|Blog, Expert Witness Laws/Procedure|Comments Off on Is Daubert or Frye used for expert witness testimony admissibility in Ohio?
The state of New Jersey follows the Frye test for the admissibility of expert witness testimony. State v. Stubblefield, 162 A.3d 1074 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2017). Under this test, expert witness testimony is admissible if the tests “are shown to be generally accepted, within the relevant scientific community, [and] to be reliable. [...]
By Steve Babitsky|2023-07-06T09:30:21-04:00November 29th, 2017|Blog, Expert Witness Laws/Procedure|Comments Off on Is Daubert or Frye used for expert witness testimony admissibility in New Jersey?
The state of Michigan follows the Daubert test for the admissibility of expert witness testimony. Chapin v. A&L Parts, Inc., 733 N.W.2d 23 (Mich. 2007). In order for expert testimony to be admissible the court must find that it is reliable. Id. This requires the court to conduct “a searching inquiry, not just of [...]
By Steve Babitsky|2023-07-06T09:30:27-04:00November 28th, 2017|Blog, Expert Witness Laws/Procedure|Comments Off on Is Daubert or Frye used for expert witness testimony admissibility in Michigan?
The state of Arizona follows the Daubert test for the admissibility of expert witness testimony. Lear v. Fields, 245 P.3d 911 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2011). Under this test, expert testimony must be “(1) scientific knowledge that (2) will assist the trier of fact to understand or determine a fact in issue.” Id. To determine if [...]
By Steve Babitsky|2023-07-06T09:30:40-04:00November 27th, 2017|Blog, Expert Witness Laws/Procedure|Comments Off on Is Daubert or Frye used for expert witness testimony admissibility in Arizona?
The state of North Carolina follows the Daubert test for the admissibility of expert witness testimony. State v. McGrady, 787 S.E.2d 1 (N.C. 2016). This rule requires that to be admissible, all expert witness testimony must be relevant and reliable. Id. Determining the relevance and reliability starts with assessing “whether the reasoning or methodology [...]
By Steve Babitsky|2023-07-06T09:30:47-04:00November 24th, 2017|Blog, Expert Witness Laws/Procedure|Comments Off on Is Daubert or Frye used for expert witness testimony admissibility in North Carolina?
The state of Illinois follows the Frye test for the admissibility of expert witness testimony. Donnellan v. First Student, Inc., 891 N.E.2d 463 (Ill. App. Ct. 2008). Under the Frye test, expert witness testimony is admissible if “the methodology underlying the opinion is ‘sufficiently established to have gained general acceptance in the particular field [...]
By Steve Babitsky|2023-07-06T09:30:56-04:00November 23rd, 2017|Blog, Expert Witness Laws/Procedure|Comments Off on Is Daubert or Frye used for expert witness testimony admissibility in Illinois?
The state of Georgia follows the Daubert test for the admissibility of expert witness testimony. Webster v. Desai, 699 S.E.2d 419 (Ga. Ct. App. 2010). Under this rule, expert testimony is admissible if it is “relevant and reliable.” This means the following must be true: “(1) the testimony is based upon sufficient facts or data [...]
By Steve Babitsky|2023-07-06T09:31:03-04:00November 22nd, 2017|Blog, Expert Witness Laws/Procedure|Comments Off on Is Daubert or Frye used for expert witness testimony admissibility in Georgia?
The state of Florida follows the Frye test for the admissibility of expert witness testimony. Holy Cross Hospital, Inc. v. Marrone, 816 So.2d 1113 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2001). Under the Frye test, pure opinion testimony from an expert witness is not admissible. Id. To allow expert witness testimony, said testimony must be deduced [...]
By Steve Babitsky|2023-07-06T09:31:09-04:00November 21st, 2017|Blog, Expert Witness Laws/Procedure|Comments Off on Is Daubert or Frye used for expert witness testimony admissibility in Florida?
The state of New York follows the Frye test for expert witness admissibility. State v. David D., 37 N.Y.S.3d 685 (N.Y. App. Div. 2016). Under this test, for evidence to be admissible it must be “generally accepted as reliable by the relevant scientific community.” Id. To determine if the evidence is generally accepted, the [...]
The state of California follows the Frye test for expert witness admissibility. People v Buell, 16 Cal.App.5th 682 (Cal. Ct. App. 2017). This test provides that admissibility of expert witness testimony regarding the expert’s testing is reliant on the “reliability of scientific testing and its scientific basis.” Id. There is a two-step process in [...]