17 Arkansas opinions name it 2 courts 2003–2025 5 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Arkansas courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.green2 sentences2025Britt argues on appeal that his trial counsel were ineffective in that they (1) failed to properly challenge the admissibility of the State’s DNA evidence under Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993); (2) failed to consult with an expert before filing a motion in connection with the Daubert hearing; (3) failed to ensure that the defense expert was adequately prepared prior to the Daubert hearing; (4) presented damaging DNA-related testimony from his own expert; (5) failed to properly cross-examine the State’s DNA experts at trial; (6) failed to present expert DNA tes 2025Britt argues on appeal that his trial counsel were ineffective in that they (1) failed to properly challenge the admissibility of the State’s DNA evidence under Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993); (2) failed to consult with an expert before filing a motion in connection with the Daubert hearing; (3) failed to ensure that the defense expert was adequately prepared prior to the Daubert hearing; (4) presented damaging DNA-related testimony from his own expert; (5) failed to properly cross-examine the State’s DNA experts at trial; (6) failed to present expert DNA tes | 2 | 4 |
Kumho Tire Co. v. Carmichaelgreen2 sentences2015The Daubert test of reliability is “flexible,” and Daubert’s list of specific factors neither necessarily nor exclusively applies to all experts or in 19every case. ■ Id. at 141-12 , 119 S.Ct. 1167 . 2015The Daubert test of reliability is “flexible,” and Daubert’s list of specific factors neither necessarily nor exclusively applies to all experts or in 19every case. ■ Id. at 141-12 , 119 S.Ct. 1167 . | 1 | 7 |
Bayer CropScience LP v. Schafergreen2 sentences2025Bayer CropScience LP v. Schafer, 2011 Ark. 518 , 385 S.W.3d 822 . 9 of procedure but may conduct the hearing in a manner as will best ascertain the rights of the party.21 Appellant argues that the FCE was subjective and thus unreliable. 2025Bayer CropScience LP v. Schafer, 2011 Ark. 518 , 385 S.W.3d 822 . 9 of procedure but may conduct the hearing in a manner as will best ascertain the rights of the party.21 Appellant argues that the FCE was subjective and thus unreliable. | 1 | 2 |
Arrow International, Inc. v. Sparksgreen2 sentences2020Consequently, the Daubert factors “neither necessarily nor exclusively apply to all experts, or in every case,” and the law grants a circuit court “the same broad latitude when it decides how to determine reliability as it enjoys [with] respect to its ultimate reliability determination.” Arrow Int’l, 81 Ark. 2020Consequently, the Daubert factors “neither necessarily nor exclusively apply to all experts, or in every case,” and the law grants a circuit court “the same broad latitude when it decides how to determine reliability as it enjoys [with] respect to its ultimate reliability determination.” Arrow Int’l, 81 Ark. | 1 | 2 |
Regions Bank v. Hagamangreen2 sentences2007Because the Daubert factors are applicable only to “novel” evidence, theory, or methodology, see Regions Bank v. Hagaman, 79 Ark. 2007Because the Daubert factors are applicable only to “novel” evidence, theory, or methodology, see Regions Bank v. Hagaman, 79 Ark. | 1 | 2 |
Britt v. Stategreen2 sentences2021See Britt v. State, 2019 Ark. 2021See Britt v. State, 2019 Ark. | 1 | 1 |
Graftenreed v. Seabaughgreen2 sentences2015App. at 374 , 268 S.W.3d at 915 (holding that the Daubert analysis was applicable only to “novel” scientific evidence, theory, or methodology); Arrow Intern., Inc. v. Sparks, 81 Ark. 2015App. at 374 , 268 S.W.3d at 915 (holding that the Daubert analysis was applicable only to “novel” scientific evidence, theory, or methodology); Arrow Intern., Inc. v. Sparks, 81 Ark. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Goffgreen2 sentences2004See, e.g., State v. Goff, 349 Ark. 532 , 79 S.W.3d 320 (2002); Fudge v. State, 341 Ark. 759 , 20 S.W.3d 315 (2000); Jones v. State, 11 Ark. 2004See, e.g., State v. Goff, 349 Ark. 532 , 79 S.W.3d 320 (2002); Fudge v. State, 341 Ark. 759 , 20 S.W.3d 315 (2000); Jones v. State, 11 Ark. | 1 | 1 |
United States v. Lavern Hankey, AKA Poo, Opiniongreen2 sentences2004See United States v. Hankey, 203 F.3d 1160 (9th Cir.2000). 2004See United States v. Hankey, 203 F.3d 1160 (9th Cir.2000). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Arkansas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance v. Foote
green
2 sentences2015The Arkansas Supreme Court adopted the Daubert analysis in Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Co. of Arkansas, Inc. v. Foote, 341 Ark. 105 , 14 S.W.3d 512 (2000). 2015The Arkansas Supreme Court adopted the Daubert analysis in Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Co. of Arkansas, Inc. v. Foote, 341 Ark. 105 , 14 S.W.3d 512 (2000). | 3 | 2005–2015 |
Northern v. State
neutral
2 sentences2025App. 426 , 467 S.W.3d 755 , in which we refused to consider a Daubert challenge on appeal because the factors had not been argued below, yet counsel made the same unprofessional error. 2025App. 426 , 467 S.W.3d 755 , in which we refused to consider a Daubert challenge on appeal because the factors had not been argued below, yet counsel made the same unprofessional error. | 1 | 2025–2025 |
Turbyfill v. State
green
2 sentences2019Turbyfill v. State, 92 Ark. 2019Turbyfill v. State, 92 Ark. | 1 | 2019–2019 |
Savage v. Union Pacific Railroad
green
2 sentences2011It recognized the “tension between the Daubert standard for admission of expert testimony and the FELA standard on causation for submission of a case to a jury.” 67 F.Supp.2d at 1027 . 2011It recognized the “tension between the Daubert standard for admission of expert testimony and the FELA standard on causation for submission of a case to a jury.” 67 F.Supp.2d at 1027 . | 1 | 2011–2011 |
Coca-Cola Bottling Co. v. Gill
green
2 sentences2007Coca-Cola Bottling Co. v. Gill, 352 Ark. 240 , 100 S.W.3d 715 (2003). 2007Coca-Cola Bottling Co. v. Gill, 352 Ark. 240 , 100 S.W.3d 715 (2003). | 1 | 2007–2007 |
Jackson v. State
green
2 sentences2005Jackson, 359 Ark. at 303 , 197 S.W.3d at 473 . 2005Jackson, 359 Ark. at 303 , 197 S.W.3d at 473 . | 1 | 2005–2005 |
Fudge v. State
green
2 sentences2004See, e.g., State v. Goff, 349 Ark. 532 , 79 S.W.3d 320 (2002); Fudge v. State, 341 Ark. 759 , 20 S.W.3d 315 (2000); Jones v. State, 11 Ark. 2004See, e.g., State v. Goff, 349 Ark. 532 , 79 S.W.3d 320 (2002); Fudge v. State, 341 Ark. 759 , 20 S.W.3d 315 (2000); Jones v. State, 11 Ark. | 1 | 2004–2004 |
Jones v. State
green
2 sentences2004See, e.g., State v. Goff, 349 Ark. 532 , 79 S.W.3d 320 (2002); Fudge v. State, 341 Ark. 759 , 20 S.W.3d 315 (2000); Jones v. State, 11 Ark. 2004See, e.g., State v. Goff, 349 Ark. 532 , 79 S.W.3d 320 (2002); Fudge v. State, 341 Ark. 759 , 20 S.W.3d 315 (2000); Jones v. State, 11 Ark. | 1 | 2004–2004 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.