Johnson v. Mead Johnson & Co.’s Empirical Analysis
754 F.3d 557 · 2014
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 4 district · 4 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. · Kumho Tire Company, Ltd., et al. v. Patrick Carmichael, Etc., et al. · Frye v. United States · Brown v. Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority · Westberry v. Gislaved Gummi AB
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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“As long as the expert's scientific testimony rests upon 'good grounds, based on what is known' it should be tested by the adversary process with competing expert testimony and cross-examination, rather than excluded by the court at the outset.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“must be reliable or trustworthy in an evidentiary sense, so that, if the finder of fact accepts it as true, it provides the assistance the finder of fact requires.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“we have consistently ruled that experts are not required to rule out all possible causes when performing the differential etiology analysis.”
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.