7 canonical passages across 7 cases, quoted by 262 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 Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc..
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Anchor | green | “vigorous cross-examination, presentation of contrary evidence, and careful instruction on the burden of proof are the traditional and appropriate means of attacking shaky but admissible evidence.” | 179 |
| 2 | Kumho Tire Co. v. Carmichael | green | “o one denies that an expert might draw a conclusion from a set of observations based on extensive and specialized experience.” | 35 |
| 3 | General Electric Co. v. Joiner | green | “othing in either daubert or the federal rules of evidence requires a district court to admit opinion evidence that is connected to existing data only by the ipse dixit of the expert.” | 28 |
| 4 | Carol Marmo v. Tyson Fresh Meats | green | “courts should resolve doubts regarding the usefulness of an expert's testimony in favor of admissibility.” | 6 |
| 5 | Mark A. Smith v. Ford Motor Company | green | “it is not the trial court's role to decide whether an expert's opinion is correct.” | 5 |
| 6 | Balkar Dhillon v. Crown Controls Corporation | green | “an expert must testify to something more than what is 'obvious to the layperson' in order to be of any particular assistance to the jury.” | 5 |
| 7 | Carolyn J. Gibbs v. Ashley C. Gibbs, a Minor Child and Andrew F. Gibbs, a Minor Child, Intervenor v. General American Life Insurance Company | green | “most of the safeguards provided for in daubert are not as essential in a case . . . where a district judge sits as the trier of fact in place of a jury.” | 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.