The ABA’s General Practice Section helps you understand the realities of Daubert.
Andrew C. Simpson writes (excerpt):
. . . Do not make the mistake of thinking that Daubert applies only to limited categories of expert witnesses. The December 1, 2000, amendments to Rules 701 and 702 of the Federal Rules of Evidence (FRE) and a majority of state jurisdictions are following Daubert in one form or another. The essence of Daubert is that methods used by an expert to reach a conclusion must be reliable. And it is likely that Daubert scrutiny will be applied to any expert, even so-called lay experts such as treating physicians, if they offer opinions rather than simply recount the nature of the treatment.
***
. . . If your expert is not following established methodology in her field; or if her conclusions seem a “stretch” given the data, consider whether you have the right expert for your case. As a general rule, the softer the science, the more important that your expert be well qualified and present a middle-of-the-road opinion.
***
The most important thing you can do to assess your opponent’s expert is to ensure you know the expertise behind his testimony better than your expert does. This is not as hard as it sounds because you must become an expert on only a very narrow area rather than the entire field. . . . Your expert can help you learn the things you need to know to understand whether the opposing expert is using reliable techniques or blowing smoke.