This is a cross reference. Click here to make the jump.

Best v. Lowe's Home Centers, Inc., 563 F.3d 171, 176-177 (6th Cir. 2009) ("Daubert attempts to strike a balance between a liberal admissibility standard for relevant evidence on the one hand and the need to exclude misleading 'junk science' on the other. See Amorgianos v. Nat'l R.R. Passenger Corp.,...A field or method that is offered as as a scientific field or method satisfies the requirements for the admissibility of evidence under Federal Rule 702 or a comparable State rule only if the field or method is shown to be genuinely scientific.

United States v. Photogrammetric Data Services, Inc., 259 F.3d 229, 244-245 (4th Cir. 2001) (upholding trial court's admission into evidence of employee's statements as admission by party's agent because (1) "the statements Webb made to the government....A statement by an agent or an employee who is not authorized to speak on behalf of the agent's principal or the employee's employer may nonetheless be treated as the statement of the principal or the employer and thus as a vicarious admission that is exempt from the prohibition against hearsay; but such a statement can be imputed to the principal or the employer only if the statement, if by an agent, is about a matter within the scope of the agent's agency or, if by an employee, the statement is about a matter within the scope of the employee's employment.

United States v. Aramony, 88 F.3d 1369, 1377-1378 (4th Cir. 1996) (upholding trial court's admission of testimony of UWA female employees which showed accused Aramony's sexual misconduct because such evidence was relevant to place accused's actions into context and to show his motive in defrauding the UWA...A person's other crimes, wrongs, or acts are not barred by the character rule either if they are not offered to show that person's propensity or if they are not offered to show that that person engaged in conduct on a particular occasion because of his or her propensity to engage in that sort of conduct.