Whatley v. Merit Distribution Services

How courts have described this case

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

• “the proponent of the expert testimony has the burden to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that the admissibility requirements of Rule 702 are satisfied.”
• “the proponent of the expert testimony has the burden to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that the admissibility requirements of Rule 702 are satisfied.”
• “the proponent of the expert testimony has the burden to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that the admissibility requirements of Rule 702 are satisfied.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

2 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Mathers v. Northshore Mining Co.
  D. Minnesota· 2003-09-15· cited 7×
• In re the Complaint of Atlantic Marine Property Holding Co.
  S.D. Alabama· 2008-08-11· cited 1×

Cites

9 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
  Supreme Court· 1993-06-28· cited 21,376×
• Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Products, Inc.
  Supreme Court· 2000-06-12· cited 12,455×
• Kumho Tire Co. v. Carmichael
  Supreme Court· 1999-03-23· cited 8,651×
• Bourjaily v. United States
  Supreme Court· 1987-06-23· cited 2,639×
• City of Tuscaloosa v. Harcros Chemicals, Inc.
  Eleventh Circuit· 1998-10-23· cited 392×
• United States v. Majors
  Eleventh Circuit· 1999-11-19· cited 87×
• Rudd v. General Motors Corp.
  M.D. Alabama· 2001-01-19· cited 24×
• Allstate Insurance v. Hugh Cole Builder, Inc.
  M.D. Alabama· 2001-04-12· cited 6×
• Senn v. Carolina Eastern, Inc.
  M.D. Alabama· 2000-06-14· cited 2×

Other cases named Whatley v. Merit Distribution Services

1 other CourtListener record shares this case name.

• Whatley v. Merit Distribution Services
  S.D. Alabama· 2000-02-16