Amendments

Exploring the Profound Effects of FRE 702 Amendments on Mass Tort Litigation Dynamics

by

WASHINGTON — Sweeping amendments to Federal Rule of Evidence 702, slated to take effect this December, are expected to transform how expert testimony is examined in mass tort litigation. These amendments aim to bring more rigor to the process of qualifying expert witnesses and their testimonies in court, amidst rising concern that dubious expert evidence has too often swayed jury decisions. Legal experts predict that with the implementation of these changes, courts will employ a stricter standard when determining the admissibility of expert testimony. The adjustments to Rule 702 emphasize that the testimony must not … Read more

Expert Analysis: Jonathan Entin Discusses Tensions in Ohio’s Dueling Redistricting Amendments

by

Columbus, Ohio — In Ohio, a critical debate on redistricting is taking center stage as conflicting amendments aim to reshape the political landscape, raising concern and speculation about the future of electoral districts in the state. This issue has caught the attention of legal and political experts who are assessing the implications of various proposed changes to the redistricting process, a vital component of democratic governance. Jonathan Entin, a legal scholar and professor emeritus at Case Western Reserve University, has provided insight into the complexities of these proposals. According to Entin, the intricacies of redistricting … Read more

New FRE 702 Amendments Set to Transform the Landscape of Mass Tort Litigation

by

Washington, D.C.— A significant amendment to Federal Rule of Evidence 702 has sparked widespread attention, particularly within the mass tort litigation community. This revision, which aims to tighten the admissibility standards for expert testimony, could markedly transform legal strategies and case outcomes across the country. Federal Rule of Evidence 702 pertains to the qualification and testimony of expert witnesses, whose insights often play a pivotal role in jury decisions. Historically, the rule allowed experts a broad scope to provide opinions, provided they were grounded in sufficient facts or data and reliably applied the principles involved. … Read more

Florida Appeal Court Rejects Challenge to Abortion Amendment’s Financial Report, Opens Door for Future Lawsuits

by

Tallahassee, FL — A recent decision by a Florida appellate court has temporarily halted a challenge against the fiscal evaluation tied to Amendment 4, designed to secure abortion rights from state restrictions. The Florida First District Court of Appeal’s unanimous verdict dismissed the complaint lodged by the advocacy group Floridians Protecting Freedom, although the door was left open for future legal action concerning the financial implications of the amendment, set to appear on the November ballot. The contentious financial impact statement in question augments projected costs to taxpayers, anticipating not only legal challenges if the … Read more