Washington Law Review
Novel Scientific Evidence after Reese v. Stroh: The Washington Supreme Court's Love Affair with Frye
Abstract
In Reese v. Stroh, the Washington Supreme Court upheld the use of the Frye test as a threshold inquiry in civil cases involving novel scientific evidence. By affirming the decision of the court of appeals, but not its reasoning, the Washington Supreme Court side-stepped the court of appeals's argument for adoption of the Daubert standard in civil cases analyzing ER 702. This Note examines the decision in Reese v. Stroh and concludes that the Washington Supreme Court failed to determine clearly the proper analysis of ER 702 in cases involving novel scientific evidence. It further agrees with Justice Johnson's concurring opinion that the Daubert test provides the appropriate analysis of ER 702 under such circumstances. It recommends that Washington adopt the Daubert standard in all cases involving novel scientific evidence to address best the needs of an increasingly technological society.
First Page
1127
Recommended Citation
Robert D. Leinbach,
Notes and Comments,
Novel Scientific Evidence after Reese v. Stroh: The Washington Supreme Court's Love Affair with Frye,
71 Wash. L. Rev.
1127
(1996).
Available at:
https://digitalcommons.law.uw.edu/wlr/vol71/iss4/9