John Brown v. Natl Railroad Passenger Corp.

How courts have described this case

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

• “But we have long held that without more than credentials and a subjective opinion, an expert’s testimony that ‘it is so’ is not admissible.” (cleaned up)
• “[W]here photographs and undisputed measurements establish that a driver approaching the crossing would have had an unobstructed view of an oncoming train, . . . trial courts [are instructed] to grant judgment as a matter of law.”
• “[W]here 15 photographs and undisputed measurements establish that a driver approaching the 16 crossing would have had an unobstructed view of an oncoming train, . . . trial courts 17 [are instructed] to grant judgment as a matter of law.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).