Larson v. Kempker’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

16 federal appellate · 8 district · 1 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. “If scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue, a witness qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education, may testify thereto in the form of an opinion or otherwise, if (1) the testimony is based upon sufficient facts or data, (2) the testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods, and (3) the witness has applied the principles and methods reliably to the facts of the case.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Somnis v. Country Mutual Insurance · Werth v. Hill-Rom, Inc.

2. ““As a general rule, the factual basis of an expert opinion goes to the credibility of the testimony, not the admissibility, and it is up to the opposing party to examine the factual basis for the opinion in cross-examination.” Hose v. Chicago NW Transp. Co., 70 F.3d 968 , 974 (8th Cir.1995) (internal quotations omitted) (citing Loudermill v. Dow Chem. Co., 863 F.2d 566, 570 (8th Cir.1988); Fed.R.Evid. 703). It is [only] “[] if an expert’s opinion is so fundamentally unsupported that it can offer no assistance to the jury[, then the testimony should not be admitted.]” Loudermill, 863 F.2d at 570 .”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 448 F. Supp. 2d 1034 - Maytag Corp. v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.