Davis v. Caterpillar, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

5 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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[I]n rejecting the expert's opinion, the [trial] court concluded that the expert's opinions failed to meet the test outlined in Frye ... designed to ensure that a jury will not be misled by experimental scientific methods which may ultimately prove to be unsound. However as plaintiffs argue and defendants as much as concede, [the expert's] opinions did not rely on new or novel scientific evidence.... * * * In sum, the expert was qualified, his testimony was based on relevant undisputed facts and did not involve any novel scientific principle, and his conclusion seems entirely logical in light of the facts. Accordingly, we conclude that the trial court abused its discretion in excluding [the expert's] testimony and entering final judgment in favor of [the defendants]. The trial court's order striking the expert testimony and entering the judgment ... [is] reversed.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 871 So. 2d 899 - Jones v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.

2. “designed to ensure that a jury will not be misled by experimental scientific methods which may ultimately prove to be unsound.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 917 So. 2d 313 - Marsh v. Valyou

3. “inadequate in light of the facts and circumstances which were presented to the trier of fact.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 815 So. 2d 687 - Basel v. McFarland & Sons, Inc.