Rule 702 Curbs AI-Based Expert Testimony
Retired Third Circuit Judge Thomas Vanaskie, serving as special master in the Valsartan products-liability litigation, ruled Sept. 3 that Dr. Sawyer cited non-existent sources generated by an AI tool but declined to exclude his expert opinions, instead permitting costs and cross-examination. The author argues courts must apply the amended Federal Rule of Evidence 702 (2000, 2023), especially the 'demonstrates to the court' admissibility standard, rather than rely on Daubert precedent.
Key Points
- 1Identifies AI-generated nonexistent citations in an expert report, prompting potential costs and trial cross-examination.
- 2Highlights reliance on Heller/Daubert language despite two Rule 702 amendments in 2000 and 2023.
- 3Urges courts to enforce Rule 702's 'demonstrates to the court' admissibility requirement, not defer to juries.
Scoring Rationale
Strong legal relevance from an official special-master ruling and Rule 702 amendments, limited by being a single case commentary.
Sources
Public references used for this report.
Practice interview problems based on real data
1,625 SQL & Python problems across 15 industry datasets — the exact type of data you work with.
Try 250 free problems
