Simon v. Simon’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 district · 44 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 46 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““ ‘ “Expert opinion testimony is admissible if it will be of special help to the jury on technical subjects [with] which the jury is not familiar or if such testimony [will] assist the jury in arriving at a reasonable factual conclusion from the evidence.” Sterba v. Jay, 249 Kan. 270 , 816 P.2d 379 (1991); Falls v. Scott, 249 Kan. 54, 63 , 815 P.2d 379 (1991). “The basis for the admission of expert testimony is necessity, arising out of the particular circumstances of the case.” Falls, 249 Kan. at 63 . (Emphasis added.) “[If] the normal experience and quahfications of jurors permit them to draw proper conclusions from [the] given facts and circumstances, expert conclusions or opinions are not necessary.” Sterba, 249 Kan. at 282-83 ; Falk, 249 Kan. at 63. Obviously, the trial court has considerable discretion in determining whether to permit expert testimony.’ ” (Quoting Marshall v. Mayflower Transit, Inc., 249 Kan. 620, 626 , 822 P.2d 591 [1991]).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Cooperwood

2. ““(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 tire witness.” K.S.A. 60-456.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. City of Wichita v. Eisenring