Crowley v. Chait

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that expert rebuttal testimony is not an opportunity to cure oversights in a party’s case-in-chief
• detailing that in nonscientific cases, “the emphasis is placed not on the methodology of the expert testimony, but on the professional and personal experience of the witness”
• detailing that in nonscientific cases, “the emphasis is placed not on the methodology of the expert testimony, but on the professional and personal experience of the witness”
• finding that an attorney drafting a report based on an interview with an expert was proper given that the expert provided substantial input into the contents of the report and signed the report
• declining to exclude an expert report where the witness “claim[ed] to have offered substantial input into what was put into the report”
• precluding expert from testifying when it constituted “simply summariz[ing] the facts and the dep- ositions of others,” but declining to exclude expert testi- mony in its entirety

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).