Wendolyn Tumlinson v. Advanced Micro Devices, Inc., No. 672, 2012 (Del. Aug. 16, 2013)
This Delaware Supreme Court decision addressed the issue of the qualifications of expert witnesses based on the decision of the United States Supreme Court in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., which has been adopted as the law of Delaware. The Supreme Court reversed a Superior Court decision that only addressed the relevance of the expert testimony and not whether it was also unreliable.
This should be compared to recent decisions in Chancery in which it was observed that Daubert motions are rare, for the same reasons that pre-trial Motions in Limine on evidentiary issues are rare. The typical practice in Chancery is to present the evidentiary issues during the bench trial, and any open evidentiary issues are often addressed as part of the routine post-trial briefing. See, e.g., Preferred Investment Services, Inc. v. T&H Bail Bond, Inc., C.A. No. 5886-VCP (Del. Ch. Jul. 24, 2013). (See transcript ruling in same case of September 14, 2012)