John Boucher v. U.S. Suzuki Motor Corp. v. American Honda Motor Co. Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding district court abused discretion in admitting expert testimony not “accompanied by a sufficient factual foundation”
• stating that expert testimony on the issue of lost future earnings should be excluded if based on unrealistic or unsubstantiated assumptions as to the plaintiffs future employment prospects
• listing “a change in family responsibilities” and “the acquisition of a new set of skills” as relevant factors
• discussing the trial judge’s broad discretion in the admission or exclusion of expert evidence
• excluding expert’s testimony on lost future earnings because it was too speculative
• “[O]ther contentions that the assumptions are unfounded go to the weight, not the admissibility, of the testimony.” (internal quotation marks omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).