Hall v. Conoco Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
886 F.3d 1308 · 2018
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. · Bones v. Honeywell International, Inc. · Christian v. Gray · Mitchell v. Gencorp Inc. · 163 Cal. App. 3d 396 - Jones v. Ortho Pharmaceutical Corp.
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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A witness who is qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education may testify in the form of an opinion or otherwise if: (a) the expert's scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will help the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue; (b) the testimony is based on sufficient facts or data; (c) the testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods; and (d) the expert has reliably applied the principles and methods to the facts of the case.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[t]he district court has 'wide latitude' in deciding whether to exclude expert testimony....”
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.