24 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 12,614 times 28 Legal Analyses
Holding that the Daubert gatekeeping standard applies not only to "scientific testimony" but also to "all expert testimony"
U.S. v. Frazier
387 F.3d 1244 (11th Cir. 2004) Cited 1,485 times 3 Legal Analyses
Holding that, under the abuse-of-discretion standard, "we must affirm unless . . . the district court has made a clear error of judgment, or has applied the wrong legal standard"
Shaw by Strain v. Strackhouse
920 F.2d 1135 (3d Cir. 1990) Cited 571 times
Holding that defendant residential service aides were clearly nonprofessional employees subject only to a deliberate indifference standard
Pride v. BIC Corp.
218 F.3d 566 (6th Cir. 2000) Cited 379 times
Holding that "[t]he failure of [plaintiff's] experts to test their hypotheses in a timely and reliable manner or to validate their hypotheses by reference to generally accepted scientific principles as applied to the facts of this case renders their testimony on [causation] unreliable and therefore inadmissible under Daubert and Federal Rules of Evidence 702 and 104"
Wilson v. Woods
163 F.3d 935 (5th Cir. 1999) Cited 342 times
Finding that a witness with a general mechanical engineering background was not qualified to offer expert testimony on a car accident
Dura Automotive Systems of Indiana, Inc. v. CTS Corp.
285 F.3d 609 (7th Cir. 2002) Cited 261 times
Holding that expert cannot give opinion that is "just parroting the opinion of [another] expert"
Jaurequi v. Carter Manufacturing Co.
173 F.3d 1076 (8th Cir. 1999) Cited 262 times
Holding a party opposing summary judgment may not rest on allegations or denials
Rosen v. Ciba-Geigy Corp.
78 F.3d 316 (7th Cir. 1996) Cited 267 times 13 Legal Analyses
Holding that experts must "adhere to the same standards of intellectual rigor that are demanded in their professional work."
Glastetter v. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp.
252 F.3d 986 (8th Cir. 2001) Cited 199 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding that a district court did not abuse of discretion in excluding a differential diagnosis that was "scientifically invalid"
Rule 702 - Testimony by Expert Witnesses
Fed. R. Evid. 702 Cited 26,664 times 255 Legal Analyses
Adopting the Daubert standard
Rule 403 - Excluding Relevant Evidence for Prejudice, Confusion, Waste of Time, or Other Reasons
Fed. R. Evid. 403 Cited 22,522 times 81 Legal Analyses
Adopting a similar standard, but requiring the probative value to be "substantially outweighed" by these risks

Eberli v. Cirrus Design Corporation

24 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, "we must affirm unless . . . the district court has made a clear error of judgment, or has applied the wrong legal standard"

Holding that defendant residential service aides were clearly nonprofessional employees subject only to a deliberate indifference standard

Finding that a witness with a general mechanical engineering background was not qualified to offer expert testimony on a car accident

Holding that expert cannot give opinion that is "just parroting the opinion of [another] expert"

Holding a party opposing summary judgment may not rest on allegations or denials

Holding that experts must "adhere to the same standards of intellectual rigor that are demanded in their professional work."

Holding that a district court did not abuse of discretion in excluding a differential diagnosis that was "scientifically invalid"

Adopting the Daubert standard

Adopting a similar standard, but requiring the probative value to be "substantially outweighed" by these risks