5 canonical passages across 4 cases, quoted by 108 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 Katie Bonner, Esau Bonner v. Isp Technologies, Inc., Crawford & Company, Inc., Movant.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Katie Bonner, Esau Bonner v. Isp Technologies, Inc., Crawford & Company, Inc., Movant Anchor | green | “as a general rule, the factual basis of an expert opinion goes to the credibility of the testimony, not the admissibility, and it is up to the opposing party to examine the factual basis for the opinion in cross-examination.” | 48 |
| 2 | Katie Bonner, Esau Bonner v. Isp Technologies, Inc., Crawford & Company, Inc., Movant | green | “is so fundamentally unsupported that it can offer no assistance to the jury.” | 23 |
| 3 | Carol Marmo v. Tyson Fresh Meats | green | “expert testimony is inadmissible if it is speculative, unsupported by sufficient facts, or contrary to the facts of the case.” | 23 |
| 4 | Diana Olson v. Ford Motor Company | green | “district courts have wide latitude in determining whether an expert's testimony is reliable.” | 8 |
| 5 | United States v. Fidel Solorio-Tafolla | green | “under daubert and rule 403 of the federal rules of evidence, the probative value of the expert testimony must not be substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of issues, or misleading the jury.” | 6 |
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.