Document: 522 U.S. 136118 S.Ct. 512139 L.Ed.2d 508 GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY, et al., Petitioners,v.Robert K. JOINER, ux. No. 96-188. Supreme Court of the United States Argued Oct. 14, 1997. Decided Dec. 15, Syllabus * After he was diagnosed with small-cell lung cancer, respondent Joiner sued in Georgia state court, alleging, inter alia, that his disease "promoted'' by workplace exposure to chemical "PCBs'' and derivative "furans'' "dioxins'' were manufactured by, or present materials petitioners. Petitioners removed case federal court moved for summary judgment. responded depositions expert witnesses, who testified PCBs, furans, dioxins can promote opined Joiner' those chemicals likely responsible cancer. The District ruled there a genuine issue material fact as whether had been exposed but granted judgment petitioners because (1) no furans dioxins, (2) experts' testimony failed show link between PCBs cancer therefore inadmissible it did not rise above "subjective belief unsupported speculation.'' In reversing, Eleventh Circuit applied "a particularly stringent standard review'' hold erred excluding testimony. Held: 1.Abuse discretion-the ordinarily applicable review evidentiary rulings-is proper which district court's decision admit exclude scientific evidence. Contrary Circuit's suggestion, Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 579, 113 2786, 125 469, somehow alter this general rule context address appellate rulings at all, indicate that, while Federal Rules Evidence allow courts somewhat broader range than pre-existing law, they leave place trial judge's "gatekeeper'' role screening such evidence ensure is only relevant, reliable. Id., 589, S.Ct., 2794-2795. A appeals applying "abuse discretion'' may categorically distinguish allowing disallow it. Compare Beech Aircraft Corp. Rainey, 488 153, 172, 109 439, 451, 102 445, Abel, 469 45, 54, 105 465, 470, 83 450. This rejects Joiner's argument granting "outcome determinative,'' should have subjected more searching review. On motion, disputed issues are resolved against moving party-here, But question admissibility an fact, reviewable under abuse discretion standard. overly "stringent'' standard, give deference hallmark P. ___. 2.A application correct indicates err issue. animal studies cited respondent's experts so dissimilar facts presented here-i.e., involved infant mice developed alveologenic adenomas after highly concentrated, massive doses injected directly into their peritoneums stomachs, whereas adult human whose carcinomas allegedly resulted from on much smaller scale-that rejected reliance studies. Nor its concluding four epidemiological relied sufficient basis opinions, since authors two ultimately unwilling suggest increases PCB among workers examined, third study particular type mineral oil necessarily relevant here, fourth numerous potential carcinogens addition PCBs. Nothing either requires opinion connected existing data ipse dixit expert. Pp. ___-___. 3.These conclusions, however, do dispose entire case. reversed Court's conclusion dioxins. Because challenge determination certiorari petition, contributed still open. 78 F.3d 524, remanded. REHNQUIST, C. J., delivered unanimous respect Parts I II, Part III, O'CONNOR, SCALIA, KENNEDY, SOUTER, THOMAS, GINSBURG, AND BREYER JJ., joined. BREYER, filed concurring opinion. STEVENS, part dissenting part. Steven R. Kuney, Washington, DC, petitioner. Lawrence G. Wallace, amicus curiae. Michael H. Gottesman, respondents. CHIEF JUSTICE REHNQUIST Court. 1 We determine what apply reviewing (1993). appropriate conclude when excluded certain proffered 2 Respondent Robert began work electrician Water & Light Department Thomasville, (City) 1973. job required him around City's electrical transformers, used mineral-based dielectric fluid coolant. often stick hands arms make repairs. would sometimes splash onto him, occasionally getting eyes mouth. 1983 City discovered some transformers contaminated polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). widely considered be hazardous health. Congress, limited exceptions, banned production sale 1978. See 90 Stat.2020, 15 U.S.C. §2605(e)(2)(A). 3 small cell 1991. He1 following year. Petitioner Monsanto 1935 1977; General Electric Westinghouse fluid. complaint linked development derivatives, dibenzofurans (furans) dibenzodioxins (dioxins). smoker approximately eight years, parents both smokers, history family. He thus perhaps already heightened risk developing eventually. suit alleged cancer; these substances, many if all. 4 court. Once there, They contended suffered significant admissible promoted factual resolution jury. largely witnesses. depositions, alone also 5 nevertheless believed contrary 864 F.Supp. 1310, 1326 (N.D.Ga.1994). Their inadmissible. 6 Appeals reversed. 524 (1996). It held " [b]ecause governing display preference admissibility, we exclusion testimony.'' Id. 529. Applying made fundamental errors. First, "drew different conclusions research each experts.'' limit determining "legal reliability testimony, leaving jury decide correctness competing opinions.'' 533. Second, incorrect, said Appeals, record supported proposition exposure. 7 petitioners' petition writ certiorari, 520 ----, 117 1243, 137 325 (1997), now reverse. II 8 argue traditional agrees contends, As reads it, phrase "particularly stringent'' announced new simply acknowledgement will devote resources analyzing decisions dispositive litigation. All reviewed argues, perfectly reasonable attention outcome-determinative. 9 rulings. Old Chief States, 519 ---- n. 1, 644, 647 136 574 450 (1984). Indeed, our cases subject go back far Spring Co. Edgar, 99 645, 658, 25 L.Ed. 487 (1878) where "cases arise very matter receive evidence; reverse case, unless ruling manifestly erroneous.'' suggested altered "austere'' Frye "general acceptance'' carried over Evidence. said: 10 "That test displaced does mean, themselves limits purportedly judge disabled To contrary, must any all admitted reliable.'' U.S., 2794-2795 (footnote omitted). 11 Thus, Frye, 445 (1988) (applying lower evidence) supra, 470 evidence). likewise reject motion judgment, 12 ruling, See, e.g., Koon 518 81, ---------, 116 2035, 2046-2047, 135 392 III 13 believe here discretion. theory liability derivatives support deposition Dr. Arnold Schecter "more Mr. causally cigarette smoking exposure.'' App. 107. Daniel Teitelbaum "lung caused degree worked.'' 140. 14 statements regarding causation nothing speculation. criticized "not . [and was] based exclusively isolated laboratory animals.'' claiming identified "relevant directed studies2 relied. agreed contention being peritoneums3 stomachs. less concentrated form. come contact generally concentration 0-500 parts per million. adenomas; carcinomas. No demonstrated One lead other species. 16 reply criticism. Rather explaining how why could extrapolated opinions seemingly far-removed studies, chose "to proceed [was] ever foundation expert's opinion.'' Joiner, F.Supp., 1324. Of course, sufficiently purported rely. litigation them. 17 concluded opinions. first Italian capacitor4 plant Bertazzi, Riboldi, Pesatori, Radice, Zocchetti, Cancer Mortality Capacitor Manufacturing Workers, American Journal Industrial Medicine 165 (1987). noted deaths ex-employees higher might expected, "there apparently grounds associating (although increased expectations) plant.'' 172. Given Bertazzi al. say 18 second followed employees worked Monsanto's plant. J. Zack D. Munsch, Workers Plant Sauget, Illinois (Dec. 1979)(unpublished report), Rec., Doc. 11. found incidence expected. increase, statistically increase 19 help. Norwegian cable manufacturing company oil. Ronneberg, Andersen, Skyberg, Incidence Among Oil-Exposed Cable Company, 45 British 595 (1988). observed workers. study, mention expressly final PCB-exposed group Japan seen deaths. Kuratsune, Nakamura, Ikeda, Hirohata, Analysis Deaths Seen Patients Yusho-A Preliminary Report, Chemosphere, Nos. 8/9, 2085 subjects carcinogens, including toxic rice ingested. 20 points 's language "focus, solely principles methodology, generate.'' 595, 2797. claims disagreement drew committed legal error properly Appeals. methodology entirely distinct one another. Trained commonly extrapolate data. too great analytical gap proffered. Turpin 959 F.2d 1349, 1360 (C.A.6), cert. denied, 506 826, 84, 121 47 (1992). That doing. 21 hold, therefore, further within upon sufficient, individually combination, These 22 Respondent's original accordingly never explicitly Whether exposure, then admissible, remain open questions. remand proceedings consistent 23 ordered. 24 Justice concurring. opinion, join, emphasizes statement judge, acting "gatekeeper,'' ""ensure reliable.''' Ante, __ (quoting 2795, (1993)). requirement ask judges subtle sophisticated determinations about relation witness seeks offer-particularly arises area science itself tentative uncertain, levels beings animals offered prove individual causation. Yet, amici pointed out, scientists training facilitate making decisions. Brief Trial Lawyers Public Amicus Curiae 15; New England Amici ("Judges trained ''). 26 neither difficulty task nor comparative lack expertise excuse exercising duties impose-determining, example, reliable "will assist trier fact,'' Fed. Rule Evid. 702, "probative value'' substantially outweighed risks prejudice, confusion waste time. 403. law intersect, exercised special care. 27 Today's tort provides example. plaintiff today's says substance caused, promoted, His concern, others, causes understandable, kills five Americans. Dept. Health Human Services, National Center Statistics, 1996-97 Injury Chartbook (1997) (23.3% 1995). Moreover, implicates cancers. Service, Toxicology Program, Seventh Annual Report Carcinogens, pp. v-vi (1994). Yet modern life, good health well economic well-being, depends use artificial chemicals. And may, important see fulfill gatekeeping function, help assure powerful engine liability, generate strong financial incentives reduce, eliminate, production, towards right substances destroy wrong ones. is, thus, essential science-related administer order achieve "end[s]'' set forth, "justly determined,'' "that truth ascertained.'' 102. 28 want specially note presenting number, Judicial Conference Courts Study Committee 97 (Apr. 2, 1990) ("Economic, statistical, technological, natural social becoming increasingly routine complex litigation''), Civil Procedure ways them overcome inherent complicated otherwise technical techniques 16's pretrial conference authority narrow dispute, hearings examination appointment masters clerks. Cecil T. Willging, Court-Appointed Experts: Defining Role Experts Appointed Under 706, 83-88 (1993); Weinstein, Individual Mass Tort Litigation 107-110 (1995); cf. Kaysen, Memoriam: Charles E. Wyzanski, Jr., 100 Harv.L.Rev. 713, 713-715 (1987) (discussing economist clerk Shoe Machinery Corp., 110 295 (D.Mass.1953), aff'd, 347 521, 74 699, 98 910 (1954)). 29 has brief "in respondents'' writes: 30 [A] better gatekeeper function she scientists. Judges strongly encouraged greater appoint Reputable recommended established organizations, Academy Sciences Association Advancement Science.'' 31 18-19; 706 (court "on own party'' serve behalf selected "agreed parties'' chosen court); (a "go beyond "utilize powers independent Evidence''). kind offer cooperative effort, community, given various Rules-authorized methods facilitating courts' task, seems me inordinately difficult implement; secure basic objectives Evidence; are, repeat, ascertainment just proceedings. 32 33 fully answered answers quite plaintiff's witnesses am sure parties adequately briefed question, explained Appeals' disposition erroneous, join III. answer performed efficiently nine members Court, 34 aspect illustrate my concern. "the least thirteen researchers, referred several reports World Organization cause cancer.'' 533 (C.A.11 1996). Only record, six discussed fair appraisal incomplete feel prepared answer. 35 seem clear, holding 702,1 interpreted (1993).2 general, irrelevant unreliable excluded. 597, 2798-2799. exclusion. 36 relevance straightforward. correctly reasoned together substances. Having 1318-1319 (N.D.Ga.1994), Correctly Daubert, "manifestly fit inadmissible.'' 1322. raised dioxins-as did-then abused her misapplied law.3 37 arguably faithful [t]he focus, 2797-2798. "weight evidence'' assess transformer fluids cancer.4 provided adequate instead taken (along interviews medical records). examined none 1324-1326. focus separate experts, methodology. 1322 ("Defendants persuade Plaintiffs' attacking draw cite''). 38 Unlike decided scientifically acceptable.5 extent, persuasive. intrinsically "unscientific'' experienced professionals arrive weighing available evidence-this sort "junk science'' concerned.6 Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) uses same risks, albeit using threshold trial. Respondents 40-41 EPA, Guidelines Carcinogen Risk Assessment, 51 Fed.Reg. 33992, 33996 (1986)). Petitioners' approach well.7 reasonably capacitor plant, coupled raises inference cancer.8 39 discussion dictum inquiry conclusions. even though agree explanation unpersuasive, critical remains unanswered: qualified reached acceptable inadmissible? 40 clearly forbids assessing validity strength jury.9 persuaded difference categorical distinction means ends, think "conclusions another,'' ante, __, accurate helps us record. 41 event, bears emphasis point applies __. keep 42 Accordingly, concur syllabus constitutes Reporter Decisions convenience reader. Detroit Timber Lumber Co., 200 321, 337, 282, 287, 50 499. wife here. For convenience, refer singular. Epidemiological examine pattern populations. peritoneum lining abdominal cavity. component stores electric charge. 702 states: "If scientific, technical, specialized knowledge understand issue, knowledge, skill, experience, training, education, testify thereto form otherwise.'' specific 54 App.D.C. 46, 293 F. 1013 (1923), remained valid enactment Evidence, went forth alternative requirements test. Even dicta, 598-601, 2799-2800 (REHNQUIST, C.J., part), ignore analysis straightforward indicate, elaborated testimony: [A]s toxicologist look going require meet criteria statistical analysis, collected you patient, Doctor, got this?' don't put mind everything know conclusion. say, "To probability toxicologist, contributing cause,' totality me. thing do, diagnosis hundred anyway.'' Supp.App. 19. explained: "Opinions derived pieces evidence, conclusive, viewed entirety building blocks conclusion, enough submitted along tests criticisms cross-examination supply.'' 532 An example phrenologist purport defendant's future dangerousness contours skull. Deposition William Bailey, Supp. 56 ("I've lot literature higher-than-expected rate death, numbers [and] value estimate significant.'' 1324 correlation results significant. 1325. diversity suit, need sole 7, Appellants 94-9131 (CA 11), 7-10). stated Daubert: "Vigorous cross-examination, presentation careful instruction burden proof shaky Additionally, event concludes scintilla supporting position insufficient juror true, free direct Civ. Proc. 50(a), grant conventional devices, rather wholesale uncompromising acceptance test, safeguards meets standards 702.'' 596, 2798.

Category: 8