§Why CasetextPricing

Opposition To Defendants Mil 4

Opposition

13 Cited authorities

  1. Sargon Enterprises, Inc. v. University of Southern California

    55 Cal.4th 747 (Cal. 2012)   Cited 764 times   11 Legal Analyses
    Finding trial court properly excluded expert testimony

  2. Southland Sod Farms v. Stover Seed Co.

    108 F.3d 1134 (9th Cir. 1997)   Cited 706 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that defendants cannot be liable for false advertising when they were not "responsible for disseminating the offending advertisements"

  3. Kannankeril v. Terminix International Inc.

    128 F.3d 802 (3d Cir. 1997)   Cited 599 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that after a defendant identifies a plausible alternative cause, it is "necessary for the plaintiffs expert to offer a good explanation as to why his or her conclusion remains reliable"

  4. People v. Pollock

    32 Cal.4th 1153 (Cal. 2004)   Cited 313 times
    Approving victim impact testimony about frequently "imagining the suffering of [the victims’] final minutes"

  5. Hose v. Chicago Northwestern Transp. Co.

    70 F.3d 968 (8th Cir. 1995)   Cited 244 times
    Ruling out alternative explanations for injuries is a valid medical method

  6. Mammoth Lakes Land Acquisition, LLC v. Town of Mammoth Lakes

    191 Cal.App.4th 435 (Cal. Ct. App. 2010)   Cited 85 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Finding sufficient evidence to support $30 million damages award based on the developer's testimony about the value of the property and expected profits

  7. Lockheed Litigation Cases

    115 Cal.App.4th 558 (Cal. Ct. App. 2004)   Cited 104 times   3 Legal Analyses

    No. B159011 February 2, 2004 Appeal from the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, JCCP No. 2967, John A. Torribio, Judge. Girardi and Keese, Thomas V. Girardi, Robert W. Finnerty and Carrie J. Rognlien for Plaintiffs and Appellants. Rose, Klein Marias and David A. Rosen for Consumer Attorneys of California as Amicus Curiae on behalf of Plaintiffs and Appellants. Horvitz Levy, Ellis J. Horvitz, David M. Axelrad and Mary-Christine Sungaila for Defendants and Respondents ExxonMobil Corporation and

  8. Korsak v. Atlas Hotels, Inc.

    2 Cal.App.4th 1516 (Cal. Ct. App. 1992)   Cited 128 times
    Excluding expert opinion where basis of opinion is unreliable hearsay

  9. Asahi Kasei Pharma Corp. v. Actelion Ltd.

    222 Cal.App.4th 945 (Cal. Ct. App. 2013)   Cited 36 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Finding substantial evidence supporting a lost profits calculation where the business "does not fit neatly into the established business versus new business paradigm"

  10. Maatuk v. Guttman

    173 Cal.App.4th 1191 (Cal. Ct. App. 2009)   Cited 17 times
    Affirming trial court's grant of motion to strike accountant's expert testimony concerning alleged lost patent royalties when there was no evidence plaintiff had an actual product or the ability to achieve actual market penetration