The question of how to address expert testimony and handle expert topics has long challenged the legal system. With an eye to
the upcoming twenty-fifth anniversary of Daubert v. Merrill Dow Pharmaceuticals,
in which the Supreme Court tasked judges to be the
gatekeepers in scientific evidence cases, Prof. Cheng will
go beyond the usual questions about the case. He'll
explore a more fundamental but arguably neglected
issue: how should a layperson make decisions about
expert topics? The answer may surprise you, and its shift
in perspective may affect how you think about not only Daubert,
but also everyday tasks like making a medical decision or
combating fake news.
We'll leave ample time for Q & A
with Prof. Cheng, and lunch will be provided.
Professor Edward Cheng is a Professor of Law and 2017–2018 FedEx Research Professor at Vanderbilt School of Law. His research focuses on scientific and
expert evidence, and the interaction between law and
statistics. Prof. Cheng is a coauthor of Modern
Scientific Evidence, a five-volume treatise that is updated
annually, and he is the host of Excited Utterance, a podcast
focusing on scholarship in evidence and proof.