Dejesus v. Crews

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that district court erred when it failed to exclude expert testimony “interpret[ing] language that needed no interpretation”
• noting that portions of an expert opinion went beyond translating arcane code words, and opined on \language that needed no interpretation\
• holding that showing of necessity was sufficient under similar circumstances
• holding that showing of necessity was sufficient under similar circumstances
• stating that “the test of reliability is flexible” and discussing district court’s discretion in determining whether expert testimony is reliable
• holding that showing of necessity was sufficient under similar circumstances

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).