Expert testimony is playing an increasingly significant role in 42 U.S.C. §1983 civil rights litigation. For example, police practices and use of force experts commonly testify in jury trials against law enforcement officers. Expert testimony can even be important in §1983 bench trials. In the highly publicized constitutional challenge to New York City’s stop and frisk practices recently tried before Judge Shira Scheindlin, each side was permitted to introduce expert testimony.1 The experts included a professor of criminology and a professor of public administration.
This column analyzes several recent federal court decisions concerning the admissibility of expert testimony likely to be of interest to §1983 litigators. The issues include: (1) expert testimony of police practices experts; (2) expert testimony relying upon aspirational standards; and (3) whether the testimony of a treating physician should be treated as a lay or expert witness testimony.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
