Lewis v. Citgo Petroleum Corp.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that an “expert’s ultimate opinion must be grounded in the scientific process and may not be merely a subjective belief or unsupported conjecture”
• concluding that plaintiff's \mild anxiety\ was not sufficiently severe to support her negligent infliction of emotional distress claim
• observing that a direct victim of alleged negligent infliction of emotional distress must satisfy the “impact” rule
• explaining that the Seventh Circuit “has repeatedly affirmed district courts that have made evidentiary rulings on proposed expert testimony in conjunction with summary judgment orders.”
• noting that a direct victim of alleged NIED in Illinois must satisfy the impact rule
• explaining that “[a] supremely qualified expert cannot waltz into the courtroom and render opinions unless those opinions are based upon some recognized scientific method and are reliable and relevant under the test set forth by the Supreme Court in Daubert.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).