10 canonical passages across 7 cases, quoted by 118 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 United States v. Ronald A. McIver and All Out Bail Bonding Giggies Bonding Company, Parties in Interest.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | United States v. Ronald A. McIver and All Out Bail Bonding Giggies Bonding Company, Parties in Interest Anchor | green | “opinion testimony that states a legal standard or draws a legal conclusion by applying law to the facts is generally inadmissible.” | 37 |
| 2 | United States v. Patrick Leroy Crisp | green | “existence and maintenance of standards controlling the technique's operation” | 31 |
| 3 | In Re Rezulin Products Liability Litigation | green | “inferences about the intent and motive of parties or others lie outside the bounds of expert testimony.” | 13 |
| 4 | The Maryland Casualty Company v. Therm-O-Disc, Incorporated | green | “come forward with evidence from which the court can determine that the proffered testimony is properly admissible.” | 10 |
| 5 | The Maryland Casualty Company v. Therm-O-Disc, Incorporated | green | “all daubert demands is that the trial judge make a 'preliminary assessment' of whether the proffered testimony is both reliable ... and helpful” | 9 |
| 6 | The Maryland Casualty Company v. Therm-O-Disc, Incorporated | green | “as in all questions of admissibility, the proffering party must come forward with evidence from which the court can determine that the proffered testimony is properly admissible.” | 5 |
| 7 | United States v. Nicholas Young | green | “if it involves specialized knowledge that will assist the trier of fact in understanding the evidence or determining a fact in issue, and is both reliable and relevant.” | 4 |
| 8 | PBM PRODUCTS, LLC v. Mead Johnson & Co. | green | “ensure that any and all scientific testimony . . . is not only relevant, but reliable.” | 3 |
| 9 | United States v. Patrick Leroy Crisp | green | “(1) whether the particular scientific theory 'can be (and has been) tested'; (2) whether the theory 'has been subjected to peer review and publication'; (3) the 'known or potential rate of error'; (4) the 'existence and maintenance of standards controlling the technique's operat…” | 3 |
| 10 | Kidder, Peabody & Co. v. IAG International Acceptance Group | green | “are the sort of questions that lay jurors have been answering without expert assistance from time immemorial,” | 3 |
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.