Forensic Accounting Final

ACCT 6380 Final Exam

1) Describe and discuss the Frye and Daubert standards, highlighting the differences between them.

Frye and Daubert are standards by which expert testimony is evaluated for admissibility in a court case. The Frye

standard is older, and is currently only followed in some states, while the Daubert standard is more widely used

across the states and has been adopted at the federal level. The primary difference between the two standards lies

with who is responsible for ultimately determining the admissibility of the testimony. Under the Frye standard, judges

rely on what an expert’s peers have said about the expert and his/her reliability. If others in the expert’s professional

community find the testimony to be helpful, the expert to be qualified, and the expert’s theories to be sound, then the

testimony passes the Frye standard. Under the Daubert standard, it is the judges themselves who are responsible

for determining the admissibility of expert testimony. The general criteria of testimony that is relevant and proven,

and an expert witness who is trustworthy, still apply under Daubert, only it is the judge deciding on how well the

testimony meets the criteria rather than deferring to the opinion of other experts. Since judges are not usually experts

in the expert witness’s profession, cases tried under Daubert tend to involve greater scrutiny over expert witnesses,

their testimony, and the facts supporting their testimony.

2) Describe the typical sequence of events for a person who serves as an expert witness. Typically who is

the first person that will contact a prospective expert witness? What is the first thing that will occur? What

activities will the expert witness typically be asked to perform as the litigation process moves along?

The first person to contact a prospective expert witness will typically be a lawyer looking for expert testimony to

support his or her client’s case. The lawyer will inform the expert of...