TTTBE Question #3: Early Answer for Patrons (Patreon)

The answer to the question was (C).  Thomas is now 1-for-3 (33%) and is nervously wondering whether law school was the right move or not.

Thomas chose (D), which earns him no points for predicting the correct result -- that the appellate court is not likely to reverse the trial court's decision -- because he picked the incorrect reason for doing so.  That answer suggested that the trial court had "absolute discretion" to decide whether an expert is competent, which is simply not true.

I think this question was pretty easy for the lawyers among us; the operative rule is Rule 702 of the Federal Rules of Evidence, and the standard is set forth in the Supreme Court's case of Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, 509 U.S. 579 (1993) .  Neither of the "yes" answers made much sense; there's no requirement for a "trial within a trial" to admit expert witness testimony, and there is certainly no requirement that a qualified expert utilize a particular methodology so long as his expertise is in a field that is recognized as science.

We hope you enjoyed playing along with TTTBE; there's more analysis forthcoming in Epsiode #30 as well as Question #4!  Keep playing!