Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
3 canonical passages across 2 cases, quoted by 21 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 Club Car, Inc. v. Club Car (Quebec) Import, Inc..
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Club Car, Inc. v. Club Car (Quebec) Import, Inc. Anchor | green | “expert testimony is admissible if (1) the expert is qualified to testify on the topic at issue, (2) the methodology used by the expert is sufficiently reliable, and (3) the testimony will assist the trier of fact.” | 9 |
| 2 | John Doe v. Rollins College | green | “the expert must be qualified; his methodology must be reliable; and his testimony must be helpful to the trier of fact.” | 8 |
| 3 | John Doe v. Rollins College | green | “the proponent of the expert testimony bears the burden of establishing each requirement by a preponderance of the evidence. . . .” | 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.