Reviewing opposing expert reports is time-intensive and requires meticulous analysis of methodology, credentials, and scientific standards. Attorneys spend 6-8 hours per report identifying Daubert or Frye vulnerabilities, cross-referencing qualifications, and developing challenge strategies—all while racing toward motion deadlines.
Reviewing opposing expert reports is time-intensive and requires meticulous analysis of methodology, credentials, and scientific standards. Attorneys spend 6-8 hours per report identifying Daubert or Frye vulnerabilities, cross-referencing qualifications, and developing challenge strategies—all while racing toward motion deadlines.
CaseMark automatically extracts expert qualifications, methodology, and opinions, then maps them against Daubert and Frye standards in minutes. The platform identifies weaknesses, inconsistencies, and unsupported conclusions, delivering a comprehensive memo with cross-examination strategies and motion recommendations ready for attorney review.
This workflow is applicable across multiple practice areas and use cases
Commercial litigation frequently involves expert witnesses on damages, valuation, accounting, industry standards, and technical matters requiring Daubert/Frye analysis and cross-examination preparation.
Expert testimony is central to commercial disputes involving complex financial, technical, or industry-specific issues, making expert witness analysis critical for case strategy and admissibility challenges.
IP litigation heavily depends on technical and damages experts whose methodologies and qualifications must withstand Daubert scrutiny, particularly in patent infringement and trade secret cases.
Patent, trademark, and trade secret cases routinely involve highly technical expert testimony on validity, infringement, and damages that requires rigorous admissibility analysis and cross-examination preparation.
Class certification and merits phases require extensive expert testimony on class definition, damages models, and statistical analysis, all subject to rigorous Daubert challenges.
Class action litigation is heavily expert-driven, particularly for certification requirements and damages calculations, making expert witness analysis essential for both plaintiffs and defendants.
Employment cases regularly involve expert witnesses on wage calculations, economic damages, workplace safety, discrimination statistics, and vocational rehabilitation requiring methodological scrutiny.
Employment litigation frequently relies on expert testimony for damages calculations, statistical analysis of discrimination claims, and vocational assessments, all subject to Daubert challenges.
Criminal defense involves challenging prosecution experts on forensics, ballistics, toxicology, digital evidence, and mental health evaluations through Daubert/Frye motions and cross-examination.
Expert testimony is often decisive in criminal cases, and challenging the admissibility and credibility of prosecution experts through methodology analysis is a core defense strategy.
CaseMark uses AI to extract the expert's methodology, data sources, and assumptions, then compares them against Daubert and Frye admissibility standards. It flags gaps in peer review, testability issues, unsupported opinions, and inconsistencies between the expert's conclusions and underlying data, providing specific citations for challenge.
Yes, CaseMark handles all expert report types including accident reconstruction, medical causation, economic loss, vocational rehabilitation, and forensic analysis. The platform adapts its Daubert/Frye analysis to the specific scientific or technical standards relevant to each expert discipline.
CaseMark processes expert reports and generates comprehensive analysis memos in 10-15 minutes, compared to the 6-8 hours typically required for manual review. You receive a structured memo with qualifications review, methodology critique, and cross-examination strategies ready for attorney refinement.
Yes, CaseMark generates targeted cross-examination strategies based on identified weaknesses in methodology, credentials, and opinions. The platform suggests specific question areas that exploit gaps in peer review, error rates, data reliability, and conflicts with established scientific principles.
CaseMark analyzes underlying data files, referenced studies, and technical materials alongside the expert report. It identifies whether the expert's conclusions are supported by the data, flags cherry-picked evidence, and highlights any deviations from accepted scientific methodology in the relevant field.
Absolutely. CaseMark's output includes a dedicated Daubert/Frye assessment section with specific admissibility challenges, legal standard citations, and motion recommendations. The analysis provides the foundation for motions to exclude or limit expert testimony, saving hours of legal research and drafting time.
CaseMark evaluates expert reports against both Daubert and Frye standards, highlighting which challenges apply to your jurisdiction. The platform identifies testability, peer review, error rates, general acceptance, and relevance issues, allowing you to tailor the analysis to your specific court's requirements.