-319-
assertion with a survey, proper sampling of the industry, or any
other type of study among companies acquiring rights, or with any
outside reliable source such as a treatise, contract form book,
practice guide, or material she may have published. Relying upon
Daubert and Kumho Tire, petitioner contends that Ms. Nemschoff’s
legal practice and experience are insufficient to establish the
requisite degree of reliability under rule 702, Federal Rules of
Evidence. Petitioner contends that there is an insurmountable
analytical gap between Ms. Nemschoff’s opinions as to what are
typical and customary steps in transferring film rights and her
conclusion that a failure to take such steps in the transaction
with CDR indicates SMP’s lack of interest in acquiring and
exploiting film rights. Finally, petitioner claims that certain
flaws in Ms. Nemschoff’s legal practice and experience undermine
her ability to comment on what is typical and customary in
transfers of film rights. Notably, petitioner contends that Ms.
Nemschoff has not identified how many times she has drafted or
reviewed a contract or worked on matters involving films or film
libraries.
c. Court’s Analysis
Personal experience and knowledge can be a reliable and
valid basis for expert testimony in many cases. See Kumho Tire
Co. v. Carmichael, supra at 150; United States v. Fredette, supra
at 1239-1240; Groobert v. President of Georgetown Coll., 219 F.
Page: Previous 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011