Kirk v. Raymark Industries, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
61 F.3d 147 · 1995
Citation profile
41 federal appellate · 11 district · 17 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 116 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently January 2024 · most notably United States v. Martinez-Salazar (2000), United States v. Kemp (2007)
41 federal appellate · 11 district · 17 state decisions — followed in 13 states
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
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 1332 (Class Action Fairness Act of 2005) · 28 U.S.C. § 1870
Relies on Batson v. Kentucky · Ohio v. Roberts · Hickman v. Taylor · Irvin v. Dowd · Wainwright v. Witt
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 116 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Because an expert witness is charged with the duty of giving his or her expert opinion regarding the matter before the court, we fail to comprehend how an expert witness, who is not an agent of the party who called him, can be authorized to make an admission for that party.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““(1) during the course of [juror #251] work history he had ‘probably eaten a couple of pounds of [asbestos] ’; “(2) he was a union shop steward for 35 years and received one-sided literature from the union regarding asbestos; “(3) he believed that 97 percent of the older workers in his local union had tested positive for asbestos in their system; “(4) he had two uncles who died of lung cancer and although they were cigarette smokers, they had been exposed to asbestos during the course of their work lives; “(5) he admitted in the first instance that he was leaning in favor of the plaintiff and against the asbestos company; “(6) he believed that he was ‘probably high on the priority list’ of getting an asbestos-related disease; and “(7) he knew ‘a lot of [union] members who presumably had asbestos-related medical problems. ’ ” Kirk, supra at 154 .”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[t]o the extent that Collins [v. Wayne Corporation, 621 F.2d 777 (5th Cir.1980) ] holds that an expert witness who is hired to testify on behalf of a party is automatically an agent of that party who called him and consequently his testimony can be admitted as non-hearsay in future proceedings, we reject this rule.”
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.