R.F.M.A.S., Inc. v. So

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that the experts lacked the specialized knowledge to determine why there was a decline in designer’s sales to retail chain.
• “Determining what motivated a particular person or entity is generally not an appropriate subject matter for expert testimony.”
• excluding expert opinion where experts “did not simply fail to consider every plausible alternative cause—rather, the record lacks any evidence that [either expert] actually investigated any other possible causes”
• \Expert testimony that is merely subjective belief or unsupported speculation should be excluded.\ (quotations omitted)
• data not inherently unreliable simply because it was provided by a party or its counsel
• “[f]or this system to work, however, plaintiffs experts must lay bare the information and assumptions on which they relied”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).