Krys v. Aaron’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 district ·

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Defendants”). . Following the filing of Plaintiffs’ initial and amended state court complaints in early 2008, Defendants removed this action to this federal Court on April 17, 2008. [See Docket Item 41 in Civil Action No. 08-1902 (JBS/AMD).] Shortly thereafter, however, the Judicial Panel on Multi-District Litigation transferred this action to the Southern District of New York (hereinafter, the "MDL District.Court”) for inclusion in MDL No. 1902. [See.Docket Item 41 in Civil Action No. 08-1902 (JBS/AMD).] Following six years of liti gation before the MDL District Court, the exchange of tens of thousands of documents (if not substantially niore), and the completion of hundreds of depositions,'the MDL-District Court transferred this action back to this Court for all further proceedings on March 24, 2014. [See Docket Item 505.] . In evaluating reliability, Daubert (and its progeny) directs courts to take into, account an array of nonexclusive factors, including: "(1) whether a method consists of a testable hypothesis; (2) whether the method has been subject to peer review; (3) the known or potential rate of error; (4) the existence and maintenance of standards controlling the technique’s‘operation; (5) whether the-method is generally accepted; (6) the relationship of the technique to methods which have been established to be reliable; (7) the qualifications of the expert witness testifying based on the methodology; and (8) the non-judicial uses to which the method has been put.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Krys v. Aaron

2. “Defendants”). . Following the filing of Plaintiffs’ initial and amended state court complaints in early 2008, Defendants removed this action to this federal Court on April 17, 2008. [See Docket Item 41 in Civil Action No. 08-1902 (JBS/AMD).] Shortly thereafter, however, the Judicial Panel on Multi-District Litigation transferred this action to the Southern District of New York (hereinafter, the”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Krys v. Aaron