4 canonical passages across 2 cases, quoted by 35 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side — they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from 103 Investors I, LP v. Square D Company.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 103 Investors I, LP v. Square D Company Anchor | green | “first, the court must determine whether the expert is qualified by 'knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education' to render an opinion.” | 10 |
| 2 | 103 Investors I, LP v. Square D Company | green | “second, if the expert is sufficiently qualified, the court must determine whether the opinion is reliable under the principles set forth in daubert.” | 9 |
| 3 | Vining v. Enterprise Financial Group | green | “the rejection of expert testimony is the exception rather than the rule.” | 9 |
| 4 | 103 Investors I, LP v. Square D Company | green | “the court may consider several nondispositive factors: (1) whether the proffered theory can be and has been tested; (2) whether the theory has been subject to peer review; (3) the known or potential rate of error; and (4) the general acceptance of a methodology in the relevant s…” | 7 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment — for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.