Elsayed Mukhtar v. California State University, Hayward

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that the court “has broad latitude in determining whether an expert’s testimony is reliable” and “in deciding how to determine the testimony’s reliability”
• stating that the court \has broad latitude in determining whether an expert's testimony is reliable\ and \in deciding how to determine the testimony's reliability\
• finding that the plaintiffs “racial discrimination case [was] a disagreement among academic professionals, which is something that Title VII does not proscribe”
• noting that a “a separate, pretrial hearing on reliability is not required”
• stating that the court “has broad latitude in determining whether an expert’s testimony is reliable” and “in deciding how to determine the testimony’s reliability”
• “Maintaining Daubert’$ standards is particularly important considering the aura of authority experts often exude, which can lead juries to give more weight to their testimony”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).