Can the other side ask the court to throw out my expert’s testimony in Georgia?


Yes. A party may ask a Georgia court to exclude an opposing expert’s testimony, and these challenges are a routine part of injury litigation. The motion asks the judge, as gatekeeper under O.C.G.A. § 24-7-702, to decide that the expert is unqualified, that the method is unreliable, or that the opinion is irrelevant, and to keep it from the jury.

How a challenge is raised

The typical vehicle is a pretrial motion, often called a Daubert motion, asking the court to limit or exclude the expert. The challenging side argues that the proposed testimony fails one or more parts of the statute. Common grounds include:

  • The witness lacks the qualifications to give the particular opinion.
  • The opinion rests on an unreliable method or insufficient facts and data.
  • There is too large an analytical gap between the data and the conclusion.
  • The testimony will not help the jury or does not fit the facts of the case.

The court may decide the motion on the written submissions, on deposition testimony, or after a pretrial hearing where the expert’s basis is examined. Because the judge must affirmatively find the testimony admissible, the side offering the expert generally bears the burden of showing the opinion meets the standard.

What exclusion does and does not mean

If the court agrees, it can exclude the expert entirely or limit the opinions the witness may offer. Reliability is assessed method by method, so a judge may allow part of an opinion and strike another part that lacks support. Exclusion can be significant: if expert testimony is required to prove an essential element, such as medical causation in a complex case, losing the expert can undermine the claim or defense it supported, sometimes leading to summary judgment.

Not every weakness leads to exclusion, though. Disputes that go to the weight of an opinion rather than its admissibility are generally left for cross-examination and the jury. The gatekeeping screen targets opinions that are unreliable or unhelpful, not opinions that are merely contestable. Where reasonable experts could disagree using sound methods, the testimony usually reaches the jury, and the other side attacks it through cross-examination and a competing expert.

A trial court’s ruling on such a motion is reviewed on appeal for abuse of discretion, which gives the judge broad latitude in deciding what the jury hears.

The bottom line

The opposing party can move to exclude an expert in Georgia, usually through a pretrial Daubert motion under O.C.G.A. § 24-7-702, arguing the witness is unqualified or the opinion unreliable or irrelevant. The judge decides as gatekeeper, and while a successful challenge can remove key testimony, weaknesses that go only to weight are left for the jury.


This article is for general educational and informational purposes only and is not legal advice. It does not create an attorney-client relationship, and Georgia law may change. For advice about a specific situation, consult a licensed Georgia personal injury attorney.

Leave a Reply