Margaret Scott v. Sears, Roebuck & Company

How courts have described this case

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

• holding it was error to permit human factors expert to testify that women wearing high heels tend to avoid walking on grates
• holding that expert testimony should not be admitted “as to a matter that is obviously within the common knowledge of jurors because such testimony, almost by definition, can be of no assistance.”
• noting that Rule 702 makes inadmissible expert testimony as to a matter which obviously is within the common knowledge of jurors
• holding it was error to permit a human factors expert to testify that persons wearing high heels tend to avoid walking on grates
• holding it was error to permit human factors expert to testify that women wearing high heels tend to avoid walking on grates
• noting that Rule 702 “makes inadmissible expert testimony as to a matter which obviously is within the common knowl- edge of jurors because such testimony, almost by definition, can be of no assistance”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).