18 Cited authorities

Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
509 U.S. 579 (1993) Cited 26,235 times 224 Legal Analyses
Holding that a trial judge must ensure that all admitted expert testimony "is not only relevant, but reliable"
Castro v. Cnty. of L.A.
833 F.3d 1060 (9th Cir. 2016) Cited 2,399 times
Holding that the Fourteenth Amendment's "objective standard" set forth in Kingsley v. Hendrickson, 135 S. Ct. 2466, applies to a pretrial detainee's failure-to-protect claim
McDonough Power Equipment, Inc. v. Greenwood
464 U.S. 548 (1984) Cited 1,400 times 7 Legal Analyses
Holding that, to obtain a new trial because of a juror's alleged untruthfulness during voir dire, "a party must first demonstrate that a juror failed to answer honestly a material question on voir dire, and then further show that a correct response would have provided a valid basis for a challenge for cause."
Gibson v. County of Washoe
290 F.3d 1175 (9th Cir. 2002) Cited 3,094 times
Holding that summary judgment is not appropriate if a jury could infer that policymakers knew that their policies would pose a risk of substantial injury
Hangarter v. Provident Life and Acc. Ins. Co.
373 F.3d 998 (9th Cir. 2004) Cited 921 times 3 Legal Analyses
Holding a district court did not abuse its discretion in qualifying an insurance expert who testified on similar issues in twelve previous cases and had never been found unqualified
Primiano v. Cook
598 F.3d 558 (9th Cir. 2010) Cited 750 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding expert physician's opinions admissible based on that physician's use of "knowledge and experience" "against a background of peer-reviewed literature" to evaluate a patient's medical records and imaging studies
City of Pomona v. SQM North America Corp.
750 F.3d 1036 (9th Cir. 2014) Cited 537 times
Holding that an expert's underlying methodology need not be endorsed by a government agency in order to be reliable
Matter of James Wilson Associates
965 F.2d 160 (7th Cir. 1992) Cited 408 times
Holding that § 1109(b) was not "intended to waive" this "limitation on standing"
Quintanilla v. City of Downey
84 F.3d 353 (9th Cir. 1996) Cited 146 times
Holding that because the plaintiff suffered only non-life threatening injuries, did not require serious medical attention, and the dog released on command, he was not entitled to a deadly force instruction
United States v. Diaz
876 F.3d 1194 (9th Cir. 2017) Cited 70 times
Holding that expert testimony that prescriptions were not given for "legitimate medical purpose" did not contain impermissible legal conclusion
Section 1983 - Civil action for deprivation of rights
42 U.S.C. § 1983 Cited 485,542 times 688 Legal Analyses
Holding liable any state actor who "subjects, or causes [a person] to be subjected" to a constitutional violation
Rule 15 - Amended and Supplemental Pleadings
Fed. R. Civ. P. 15 Cited 90,251 times 91 Legal Analyses
Finding that, per N.Y. C.P.L.R. § 1024, New York law provides a more forgiving principle for relation back in the context of naming John Doe defendants described with particularity in the complaint

Gohranson v. Snohomish County et al

18 Cited authorities

Holding that a trial judge must ensure that all admitted expert testimony "is not only relevant, but reliable"

Holding that the Fourteenth Amendment's "objective standard" set forth in Kingsley v. Hendrickson, 135 S. Ct. 2466, applies to a pretrial detainee's failure-to-protect claim

Holding that summary judgment is not appropriate if a jury could infer that policymakers knew that their policies would pose a risk of substantial injury

Holding a district court did not abuse its discretion in qualifying an insurance expert who testified on similar issues in twelve previous cases and had never been found unqualified

Holding expert physician's opinions admissible based on that physician's use of "knowledge and experience" "against a background of peer-reviewed literature" to evaluate a patient's medical records and imaging studies

Holding that an expert's underlying methodology need not be endorsed by a government agency in order to be reliable

Holding that § 1109(b) was not "intended to waive" this "limitation on standing"

Holding that because the plaintiff suffered only non-life threatening injuries, did not require serious medical attention, and the dog released on command, he was not entitled to a deadly force instruction

Holding that expert testimony that prescriptions were not given for "legitimate medical purpose" did not contain impermissible legal conclusion

Holding liable any state actor who "subjects, or causes [a person] to be subjected" to a constitutional violation

Finding that, per N.Y. C.P.L.R. § 1024, New York law provides a more forgiving principle for relation back in the context of naming John Doe defendants described with particularity in the complaint