4 canonical passages across 3 cases, quoted by 22 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 Zavala v. Powermatic, Inc..
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Zavala v. Powermatic, Inc. Anchor | green | “knowledge and application of principles of science beyond the ken of the average juror.” | 9 |
| 2 | Dyback v. Weber | green | “an expert witness' opinion cannot be based on mere conjecture and guess.” | 5 |
| 3 | Dyback v. Weber | green | “an expert witness' opinion cannot be based on mere conjecture and guess” | 4 |
| 4 | Van Breemen v. Department of Professional Regulation | green | “whether the work of an engineer, unlicensed in the state of illinois, as an illinois supreme court rule 213(f) retained opinion witness in a litigated matter in the state of illinois, constitutes the unlicensed practice of professional engineering under the illinois professional…” | 4 |
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.