Daubert v. NRA Group, LLC’s Empirical Analysis
861 F.3d 382 · 2017
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 1 district · 3 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 15 U.S.C. § 1692 (Fair Debt Collection Practices Act) · 15 U.S.C. § 1692F (Sherman Antitrust Act) · 15 U.S.C. § 1692K (Sherman Antitrust Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 1331 · 47 U.S.C. § 227
Relies on Celotex Corporation v. Catrett H · Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio Corporation · Jerman v. Carlisle, McNellie, Rini, Kramer & Ulrich, L.P.A. · Camreta v. Greene Ex Rel. S. G. · Camreta v. Greene
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 17 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[W]e review a district court's decision to exclude materials under the sham-affidavit doctrine for abuse of discretion.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“If, for example, the witness shows she was confused at the earlier deposition or for some other reason misspoke, the subsequent correcting or clarifying affidavit may be sufficient to create a material dispute of fact. Same result if there's independent evidence in the record to bolster an otherwise questionable affidavit. The court may, on the other hand, disregard an affidavit when the affiant was carefully questioned on the issue, had access to the relevant information at that time, and provided no satisfactory explanation for the later contradiction. It may similarly disregard an affidavit entirely unsupported by the record and directly contrary to other relevant testimony, or if it's clear the affidavit was offered solely to defeat summary judgment.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“The court may ... disregard an affidavit when the 'affiant was carefully questioned on the issue, had access to the relevant information at that time, and provided no satisfactory explanation for the later contradiction.' " Daubert v. NRA Grp., LLC , 861 F.3d 382 , 392 (3d Cir. 2017) (quoting Martin v. Merrell Dow Pharm., Inc. , 851 F.2d 703 , 706 (3d Cir. 1988) ). The Court "may similarly disregard an affidavit 'entirely unsupported by the record and directly contrary to [other relevant] testimony,' or if it's 'clear' the affidavit was offered 'solely' to defeat summary judgment[.]”
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.