Brain injury sufferers have a lot to contend with. Not only are there physical limitations, but a victim may also suffer emotional damage. Recovering from brain injuries can take a long time, and, for many sufferers, a full recovery isn’t a possibility. However, even those who are unable to recover from their harm may be able to improve their condition and alleviate their symptoms with the proper medical treatment and rehabilitation. Such care can be costly, though, which is why brain injury victims whose damages were caused by the negligence of another may choose to pursue compensation via a personal injury lawsuit.
In many of these cases, a victim will need to introduce scientific evidence to prove both the cause of their injury as well as the extent of the harm they have suffered. Yet, with constant advances in the field of science, one method of discovery could be deemed invalid either because it has been proven to be flawed, or because it is too new to be validated. This is why the court applies what is referred to as the “Daubert Standard.”
The Daubert Standard allows judges to apply a number of factors to determine whether it is appropriate to apply a scientific method or reasoning to the facts at issue during trial. The factors considered include whether the method or theory has been tested, whether it has been published and reviewed by the proponent’s peers, whether the method or theory is subjected to operating standards, whether the proposed method or theory has gained acceptance within the scientific community, and the likelihood of the method resulting in error.
Although this preliminary matter may seem cumbersome, it can prove crucial in cases where scientific evidence can prove key elements of a claim. Therefore, those who have suffered harm at the hands of another and are considering a personal injury lawsuit may want to discuss the best way to approach their case with a qualified attorney.
Source: Cornell University Law School, “Daubert Standard,” accessed on April 22, 2017
