Goeb v. Tharaldson’s Empirical Analysis
2000
Citation profile
2 district · 38 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 7 U.S.C. § 136 (Federal Environmental Pesticide Control Act of 1972) · 7 U.S.C. § 136A · 7 U.S.C. § 136V
Relies on Celotex Corporation v. Catrett H · Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. · Kumho Tire Company, Ltd., et al. v. Patrick Carmichael, Etc., et al. · General Electric Co. v. Joiner · Cipollone v. Liggett Group, Inc.
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 41 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“First, a novel scientific technique that produces evidence to be admitted at trial must be shown to be generally accepted within the relevant scientific community, and second, the particular evidence derived from the technique and used in an individual case must have a foundation that is scientifically reliable. Put another way, the Frye-Mack standard asks first whether experts in the field widely share the view that the results of scientific testing are scientifically reliable, and second whether the laboratory conducting the tests in the individual case complied with appropriate standards and controls.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Bailey · State v. Traylor“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. The opinion must have foundational reliability. In addition, if the opinion or evidence involves novel scientific theory, the proponent must establish that the underlying scientific evi dence is generally accepted in the relevant scientific community.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. State v. Obeta · State v. Sharpe“[U]nder the Frye prong of the Frye-Mack standard, the trial judge defers to the scientific community’s assessment of a given technique, and the appellate court reviews de novo the legal determination of whether the scientific methodology has obtained general acceptance in the scientific community.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. State v. Traylor · State v. Sharpe
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.