Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 290 F.3d 446 - Hochen ex rel. Estate of Hochen v. Bobst Group, Inc.

Hochen ex rel. Estate of Hochen v. Bobst Group, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

290 F.3d 446 · 2002

Citation profile

28
cited by 28 later decisions
February 2025
most recently cited

10 federal appellate · 11 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently February 2025 · most notably United States v. Espinal-Almeida (2012), Currier v. United Technologies Corp. (2004)

10 federal appellate · 11 district ·

170200220102020decided

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 · Weisgram v. Marley Co. · Katz v. City Metal Co.

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. “we may not consider the credibility of witnesses, resolve conflicts in testimony, or evaluate the weight of the evidence.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “only if, 'applying these standards, the evidence does not permit a reasonable jury to find in favor of' appellant[].”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “ensuring that an expert's testimony both rests on a reliable foundation and is relevant to the task at hand,”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.