Campbell v. Fawber’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 district · 1 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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “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
   e.g. Young v. Swiney

2. “Nothing contained in the agency’s response suggests that the final rule categorically excluded torso augmentation or diving as a cause of head- and neck injury in a rollover crash. To the contrary, the NHTSA’s response was resolutely probabilistic. Furthermore, [the plaintiff] has shown nothing in the NHTSA’s regulations that would suggest that the agency’s study of roof crush injuries could prevent a party from presenting at trial evidence of an alternative explanation.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 2014 Pa. Super. 281 - Parr, J. v. Ford Motor Company

3. “all civil proceedings arising under title 11, or arising in or related to cases under title 11,”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Intelect Corporation v. Cellco Partnership Gp