State v. Lemler’s Empirical Analysis
2009
Citation profile
61 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 63 later decisions — most recently February 2026 · most notably Thurman v. Cuna Mutual Insurance Society (2013), State v. Huber (2010)
61 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. · Kumho Tire Company, Ltd., et al. v. Patrick Carmichael, Etc., et al. · General Electric Co. v. Joiner · United States v. Davis · Arneson v. Arneson
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 63 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“is a fundamental error of judgment, a choice outside the range of permissible choices, a decision, which, on full consideration, is arbitrary or unreasonable.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“If scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue, a witness qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education, may testify thereto in the form of an opinion or otherwise, if: (1) The testimony is based upon sufficient facts or data, (2) The testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods, and (3) The witness has applied the principles and methods reliably to the facts of the case.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Fisher · State v. Johnson“[w]e review a trial court's 'decision to admit or deny an expert's testimony under the abuse of discretion standard.' ” State v. Kvasnicka, 2013 S.D. 25, ¶ 18 , 829 N.W.2d 123, 128 (quoting State v. Lemler, 2009 S.D. 86 , ¶ 18, 774 N.W.2d 272, 278 ). An abuse of discretion is”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Buchholtz
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.