Admissibility index
Admissibility, jurisdiction by jurisdiction
Whether an expert's opinion reaches the jury depends first on the admissibility standard of the forum. This index records the governing standard for each of the 11 jurisdictions in this docket, summarised from the published state compendia named below. It is a research starting point for counsel — not legal advice, and not a substitute for the current rule and case law of the forum, which counsel must confirm before relying on it.
| Jurisdiction | Governing standard | Firms in docket |
|---|---|---|
| New York | Frye — general acceptance | 141 |
| Texas | Daubert — Robinson reliability | 38 |
| Arizona | Daubert | 32 |
| California | Kelly / Frye — general acceptance | 21 |
| Illinois | Frye — general acceptance | 12 |
| Florida | Daubert | 10 |
| Georgia | Daubert-based statute | 6 |
| New Jersey | Daubert-based reliability | 3 |
| North Carolina | Daubert | 1 |
| District Of Columbia | Daubert | 1 |
| Virginia | State reliability standard | 1 |
How to read this index
Daubert jurisdictions test reliability through the trial judge under a Rule 702 framework. Frye jurisdictions test general acceptance in the relevant scientific community. Several states apply a Daubert-based statute or methodology without adopting the federal rule wholesale, and Virginia applies its own statutory reliability test. The distinction is explained in Daubert and Frye, explained.
Sources consulted 2026-11-02: Expert Institute, "Daubert vs. Frye: A State-by-State Comparison"; White & Williams LLP, "States Following the Daubert/Kumho Doctrine" chart; NCJI, "State-by-State Compendium — Standards of Evidence" (July 2023).