Kane v. Motorola, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that appellants waived their argument that the trial court abused its discretion in limiting the scope of discovery because they failed to attach a Rule 191(b) affidavit to their summary judgment pleadings
• finding that appellants waived their argument that the trial court abused its discretion in limiting the scope of discovery because they failed to attach a Rule 191(b) affidavit to their summary judgment pleadings
• discussing Joiner and the “analytical gap” concept when applying a Frye analysis
• courts may reject an expert’s conclusions when his extrapolation methodologies are unsound or when the scientific data upon which they rely is not related to the conclusion reached
• the plaintiffs’ failure to request additional discovery meant they could not later complain that discovery was insufficient or limited

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).