Waggaman v. Forstmann’s Empirical Analysis
1966
Citation profile
1 district · 24 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently December 2012 · most notably Ibn-Tamas v. United States (1979), District of Columbia v. White (1982)
1 district · 24 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 Jenkins v. United States · Woods v. Interstate Realty Co. · Kenney v. Washington Properties, Inc. · Pollard v. Hawfield · Henkel v. Varner
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 25 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ . . . [T]o warrant the use of expert testimony the subject dealt with must be so distinctively related to some science, profession, business or occupation as to be beyond the ken of the average layman .... [w]here the trier of facts is as competent as an expert to consider and weigh the evidence and to draw conclusions therefrom, it is improper to use expert testimony.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage
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.