Dieker v. Case Corp.’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate · 10 district · 14 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 28 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““The qualification of an expert witness as well as the admissibility of expert testimony are matters within the broad discretion of the trial court. The admissibility of expert testimony is a matter to be determined by the trial court in the exercise of its discretion. The trial court’s determination will not be overturned absent an abuse of such discretion.” “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. K.S.A. 60-456(b).” Dieker v. Case Corp., 276 Kan. 141 , Syl. ¶¶ 1, 2, 73 P.3d 133 (2003).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Pullen v. West

2. ““ ‘A witness, in order to be competent as an expert, must show himself to be skilled or experienced in the business or profession to which the subject relates. There are no precise requirements as to the mode in which skill or experience shall have been acquired. ... A witness may be competent to testily as an expert although his knowledge was acquired through the medium of practical experience rather than by scientific study and research.’ ””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 42 Kan. App. 2d 122 - Southwind Exploration, LLC v. Street Abstract Co.