Hallmark v. Eldridge

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that evidence was improperly admitted where a medical expert failed to testify to a \reasonable degree of medical certainty\
• stating that \federal court decisions discussing [an analogous federal rule of evidence] may provide persuasive authority\ to help this court interpret its own rules
• holding the three main requirements for the admissibility of expert testimony are qualification, assistance, and limited scope
• requiring that expert testimony be \relevant and the product of reliable methodology\ (footnote omitted)
• stating that the district court must determine whether the expert's testimony will assist the trier of fact, and explaining that the testimony will assist the trier of fact \only when it is relevant and the product of reliable methodology\ (footnote omitted)
• stating that the district court must determine whether the expert's testimony will assist the trier of fact, and explaining that the testimony will assist the trier of fact \only when it is relevant and the product of reliable methodology\ (footnote omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).