Legal Opinion
Harris v. Koenig
District Court, District of Columbia
Decided June 27, 2011No. Civil Action 02-618PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
GLADYS KESSLER, District Judge.
The Waste Management Defendants 1 have filed, pursuant to Federal Rule of Evidence 702 (Defs.’ Mot.) (March 30, 2011) [Dkt. No. 444], a Motion to Exclude the Opinion Testimony of Saul Solomon Upon consideration of the Motion, the Opposition, the Reply, and the applicable case law, the Court concludes that the Motion will be denied for the following reasons.
Under Rule 702, a trial court may only admit expert testimony that is both relevant and reliable. Kumho Tire Co. v. Carmichael, 526 U.S. 137, 141, 119 S.Ct. 1167, 143 L.Ed.2d 238 (1999);…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Kumho Tire Co. v. CarmichaelSupreme Court of the United States · 1999
- Teresa Ambrosini v. Jorge Labarraque and the Upjohn CompanyCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1996
- Graden v. Conexant Systems Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2007
- United States ex rel. Miller v. Bill Harbert International Construction, Inc.Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2010
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Barnes v. District of ColumbiaDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2013
- Mahnke v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit AuthorityDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2011
- Rothe Development, Inc. v. Department of DefenseDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2015
- Robinson v. District of ColumbiaDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2014
- Dl v. District of ColumbiaDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2015
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.