United States v. Pollard’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “The letter from Drs. Rosenbloom and Tanner precipitated a scholarly discussion between physicians in the journal Pediatrics, resulting in a separate letter from Dr. Rosenbloom explaining that neither he nor Dr. Tanner intended to imply that physicians refrain from providing expert testimony in suspected child pornography cases, only that they should refrain from providing testimony as to chronologic age based on Tanner staging. In fact, Dr. Rosenbloom wrote there is a real question as to whether the Tanner scale should be used at all in determining chronologic age because the expert pediatrician comes to the evidence with the ability to estimate age based on facial appearance, body shape, muscular development, and sexual maturation.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. United States v. Hammer

2. “The inquiry envisioned by Rule 702 is ... a flexible one. Its overarching subject is the scientific validity and thus the evidentiary relevance and reliability of the principles that underlie a proposed submission. The focus, of course, must be solely on principles and methodology, not on the conclusions that they generate.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 589 F. Supp. 2d 974 - Brock v. Positive Changes Hypnosis, LLC