197 W. Va. 62 - Craddock v. Watson’s Empirical Analysis
1996
Citation profile
4 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. · 148 W. Va. 160 - Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. Federal Insurance Co. of New York · 192 W. Va. 189 - Painter v. Peavy · 194 W. Va. 52 - Williams v. Precision Coil, Inc. · 196 W. Va. 294 - State v. LaRock
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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The trial court’s determination regarding whether the scientific evidence is properly the subject of scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge is a question of law that we review de novo. On the other hand, the relevancy requirement compels the trial judge to determine ... that the scientific evidence “will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue.” W. Va. R. Evid. 702. Appellate review of the trial court’s rulings under the relevancy requirement is under an abuse of discretion standard.[ 19 ]”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Coon
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.