Zimmerman v. Powell

How courts have described this case

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

• holding “the trial court ‘must explain its choices’ so that the appellate court has an adequate basis to determine whether the analytical path taken by the trial court was within the range of reasonable methods for distinguishing reliable expert testimony from false expertise”
• “Our rules of judicial restraint generally preclude appellate review of issues that depend on matters not yet developed.”
• “An appellate court is limited to a cold record and thus is not in a position to perform the gatekeeping role in a manner that is fair to the parties.”
• trial court need not recite Daubert standard, but must explain its decision so that appellate court has adequate basis to determine whether analytical path taken by trial court was within range of reasonable methods for distinguishing reliable expert testimony from false expertise
• trial court need not recite Daubert standard, but must explain its decision so that appellate court has adequate basis to determine whether analytical path taken by trial court was within range of reason- able methods for distinguishing reliable expert testimony from false expertise

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).