Futrell v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis
2015
Citation profile
8
cited by 8 later decisions
6
states following
January 2026
most recently cited
7 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. · Delaware v. Van Arsdall · Davis v. Alaska · Kumho Tire Company, Ltd., et al. v. Patrick Carmichael, Etc., et al. · Estelle v. McGuire
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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"In our courts, the admissibility of expert testimony is governed by Kentucky Rule of Evidence (KRE) 702. That rule provides as follows: "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. "Our rule is identical to its federal counterpart, Rule 702 of the Federal Rules of Evidence. Both rules incorporate guidance provided by the Supreme Court in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. , 509 U.S. 579 , 113 S.Ct. 2786 , 125 L.Ed.2d 469 (1993). Under Daubert , a trial court's task in assessing proffered expert testimony is to determine whether the testimony 'both rests on a reliable foundation and is relevant to the task at hand.' Daubert , 509 U.S. at 597 , 113 S.Ct. 2786 . In making its reliability determination, the trial court must consider " 'whether the reasoning or methodology underlying the testimony is scientifically valid and whether that reasoning or methodology properly can be applied to the facts in issue.' " Toyota Motor Corp. v. Gregory , 136 S.W.3d 35 , 39 (Ky. 2004) (quoting Daubert , 509 U.S.”
2 later decisions 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.