41 Cited authorities

Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
509 U.S. 579 (1993) Cited 26,290 times 225 Legal Analyses
Holding that a trial judge must ensure that all admitted expert testimony "is not only relevant, but reliable"
Kumho Tire Co. v. Carmichael
526 U.S. 137 (1999) Cited 12,612 times 28 Legal Analyses
Holding that the Daubert gatekeeping standard applies not only to "scientific testimony" but also to "all expert testimony"
General Electric Co. v. Joiner
522 U.S. 136 (1997) Cited 4,861 times 41 Legal Analyses
Holding that under the abuse of discretion standard the appellate court will not reverse unless the ruling is manifestly erroneous
In re Paoli R.R. Yard PCB Litigation
35 F.3d 717 (3d Cir. 1994) Cited 2,110 times 8 Legal Analyses
Holding an expert's testimony unreliable because he did not consider alternative causes
Pipitone v. Biomatrix, Inc.
288 F.3d 239 (5th Cir. 2002) Cited 872 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that jury was entitled to hear expert testimony and decide whether to accept or reject it after considering whether predicate facts on which expert relied were accurate
Amorgianos v. National R.R. Passenger Corp.
303 F.3d 256 (2d Cir. 2002) Cited 858 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that we undertake a Daubert analysis "without regard to the conclusions the expert has reached or [our] belief as to the correctness of those conclusions"
McCullock v. H.B. Fuller Co.
61 F.3d 1038 (2d Cir. 1995) Cited 490 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that "[d]isputes as to the strength of [expert'] credentials, faults in his use of differential etiology as a methodology, or lack of textual authority for his opinion, go to the weight, not the admissibility, of his testimony."
United States v. Ebron
683 F.3d 105 (5th Cir. 2012) Cited 222 times
Holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion in allowing the Government to inquire on redirect about a specific instance of prior conduct when on cross the defendant had opened the door to the issue
Boucher v. U.S. Suzuki Motor Corp.
73 F.3d 18 (2d Cir. 1996) Cited 351 times
Holding district court abused discretion in admitting expert testimony not "accompanied by a sufficient factual foundation"
Cornell v. 360 West 51st Street Realty, LLC
2014 N.Y. Slip Op. 2096 (N.Y. 2014) Cited 150 times 5 Legal Analyses
Reversing denial of summary judgment in toxic tort case that included IIED claim because plaintiff failed to satisfy Parker causation standard
Section 1640 - Civil liability
15 U.S.C. § 1640 Cited 4,914 times 25 Legal Analyses
Holding "any creditor who fails to comply" liable, with creditors defined within § 1602(g) as persons
Rule 703 - Bases of an Expert's Opinion Testimony
Fed. R. Evid. 703 Cited 4,719 times 26 Legal Analyses
Explaining that facts or data of a type upon which experts in the field would reasonably rely in forming an opinion need not be admissible in order for the expert's opinion based on the facts and data to be admitted

Crawford v. Franklin Credit Management Corporation et al

41 Cited authorities

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

Holding that the Daubert gatekeeping standard applies not only to "scientific testimony" but also to "all expert testimony"

Holding that under the abuse of discretion standard the appellate court will not reverse unless the ruling is manifestly erroneous

Holding an expert's testimony unreliable because he did not consider alternative causes

Holding that jury was entitled to hear expert testimony and decide whether to accept or reject it after considering whether predicate facts on which expert relied were accurate

Holding that we undertake a Daubert analysis "without regard to the conclusions the expert has reached or [our] belief as to the correctness of those conclusions"

Holding that "[d]isputes as to the strength of [expert'] credentials, faults in his use of differential etiology as a methodology, or lack of textual authority for his opinion, go to the weight, not the admissibility, of his testimony."

Holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion in allowing the Government to inquire on redirect about a specific instance of prior conduct when on cross the defendant had opened the door to the issue

Holding district court abused discretion in admitting expert testimony not "accompanied by a sufficient factual foundation"

Reversing denial of summary judgment in toxic tort case that included IIED claim because plaintiff failed to satisfy Parker causation standard

Holding "any creditor who fails to comply" liable, with creditors defined within § 1602(g) as persons

Explaining that facts or data of a type upon which experts in the field would reasonably rely in forming an opinion need not be admissible in order for the expert's opinion based on the facts and data to be admitted