green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
4.0 score
“the admissibility of expert testimony is often decided after a separate hearing. however, the trial judge is not required to hold a hearing on the admissibility of expert evidence.”
Treatment trajectory · 2000 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2000
2013
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 6 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
United States v. Jorge Alberto Alatorre
the admissibility of expert testimony is often decided after a separate hearing. however, the trial judge is not required to hold a hearing on the admissibility of expert evidence.
discussed
Cited "see"
Liverman v. City of Petersburg
See Benningfield v. City of Houston, 157 F.3d 369, 376-77 (5th Cir.1998) (holding that employees “falsely accused” of criminal wrongdoing and “verbally reprimanded” by their employer failed to allege adverse employment actions sufficient to constitute retaliation), cert. denied, 526 U.S. 1065 , 119 S.Ct. 1457 , 143 L.Ed.2d 543 (1999); Harrington v. Harris, 118 F.3d 359, 366 (5th Cir.1997) (holding that an employer’s criticism of employees and failure to award them merit pay increases did not constitute actionable adverse employment actions).
cited
Cited "see"
Burda Bros. v. Walsh
See Stajos v. City of Lansing, 221 Mich.App. 223 , 561 N.W.2d 116 (1997), Iv. denied, 459 Mich. 851 , 584 N.W.2d 588 (1998), cert. denied, 526 U.S. 1065 , 119 S.Ct. 1455 , 143 L.Ed.2d 542 (1999).
discussed
Cited "see"
Cruse v. G & J USA Publishing
See Orisek v. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 938 F.Supp. 185, 191 (S.D.N.Y.1996), aff'd, 162 F.3d 1148 (2d Cir.1998), cert. denied, 526 U.S. 1065 , 119 S.Ct. 1456 , 143 L.Ed.2d 542 (1999) (pretext not found where employee’s job description remained the same but her duties expanded and a different approach was required); Healy v. New York Life Ins.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Brenord v. Catholic Medical Center of Brooklyn and Queens, Inc.
See e.g., Kirstein v. Parks Corp., 159 F.3d 1065, 1067 (7th Cir.1998) ("we have not required that the Daubert inquiry take any specific form and have, in fact, upheld a judge’s sua sponte consideration on the admissibility of expert testimony”), ce rt. denied, 526 U.S. 1065 , 119 S.Ct. 1456 , 143 L.Ed.2d 542 (1999); Proujansky v. Blau, 1999 WL 124457 , *1 (S.D.N.Y.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Rudd v. General Motors Corp.
See United States v. Majors, 196 F.3d 1206, 1215 (11th Cir.1999) (the trial court did not abuse its discretion in deciding to admit expert testimony without the benefit of a Daubert hearing after determining that the expert possessed specialized knowledge by virtue of his practical training and experience), cert. denied, 529 U.S. 1137 , 120 S.Ct. 2022 , 146 L.Ed.2d 969 (2000); City of Tuscaloosa v. Harcros Chemicals, Inc., 158 F.3d 548 , 564 n. 21 (11th Cir.1998) (while complicated cases involving multiple expert witnesses are well-served by the holding of a Daubert hearing, such hearings are …
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Steeltek, Inc.
v.
Griffin
v.
Griffin
No. 98-1194.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Apr 19, 1999.
526 U.S. 1065
Published
Citer courts: Ninth Circuit (1)
C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.