5 canonical passages across 5 cases, quoted by 66 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 Bethie Pride v. Bic Corporation Societe Bic, S.A..
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Bethie Pride v. Bic Corporation Societe Bic, S.A. Anchor | green | “this requirement has been interpreted to mean that scientific testimony must 'fit' the facts of the case, that is, there must be a connection between the scientific research or test result being offered and the disputed factual issues in the case in which the expert will testify.” | 14 |
| 2 | Tinna Dilts v. United Group Services, LLC | green | “an expert's lack of experience in a particular subject matter does not render him unqualified so long as his general knowledge in the field can assist the trier of fact.” | 14 |
| 3 | Cynthia Madej v. Jeff Maiden | green | “whether an opinion 'relates to an issue in the case' or helps a jury answer a 'specific question' depends on the claims before the court.” | 14 |
| 4 | United States v. David Casillas | green | “the rule 702 analysis proceeds in three stages.” | 12 |
| 5 | Burgett v. Troy-Bilt LLC | green | “minimal qualifications' requirement-not one who could teach a graduate seminar on the subject.” | 12 |
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.