Bitler v. A.O. Smith Corp.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• opining that expert’s “personal experience, training, method of observation, and deductive reasoning [were] sufficiently reliable to constitute ‘scientifically valid’ methodology”
• recognizing “the wide latitude a district court has in exercising its discretion to admit or exclude expert testimony”
• holding that a fire investigator’s expert opinion on the cause of a fire was reliable when it was based on his experience, knowledge, deductive reasoning, and ob- servations of physical evidence at the scene because that method was generally acceptable in the field
• explaining that “when the conclusion simply does not follow from the data, a district court is free to determine that an impermissible analytical gap exists between premises and conclusion”
• explaining that “it is not always a straightforward exercise to disaggregate method and conclusion”
• finding expert conclusions based on experience and knowledge reliable because that method was generally acceptable in the field

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).