Sterba Ex Rel. Beecham v. Jay’s Empirical Analysis
1991
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 2 district · 31 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 35 later decisions — most recently February 2018 · most notably State v. Holmes (2004), Smith v. Printup (1993)
2 federal appellate · 2 district · 31 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 Palmer v. Brown · Sampson v. Hunt · Hoffman v. Haug · Plains Transport of Kansas, Inc. v. King · Webb v. Lungstrum
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 35 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““(b) If the witness is testifying as an expert, testimony of the witness in the form of opinions or inferences is limited to such opinions as the judge finds are (1) based on facts or data perceived by or personally known or made known to the witness at the hearing and (2) within the scope of the special knowledge, skill, experience or training possessed by the witness. “(d) Testimony in the form of opinions or inferences otherwise admissible under this article is not objectionable because it embraces the ultimate issue or issues to be decided by the trier of the fact.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Where the normal experience and qualifications of jurors permit them to draw proper conclusions from given facts and circumstances, expert conclusions or opinions are not necessary.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Kahler
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.