General Electric Co. v. Joiner | |
---|---|
Argued Oct 14, 1997 Decided Dec 15, 1997 | |
Full case name | General Electric Company v. Robert Joiner |
Docket no. | 96–188 |
Citations | 522 U.S. 136 (more) 118 S. Ct. 512; 139 L. Ed. 2d 508; 1997 U.S. LEXIS 7503 |
Holding | |
Abuse of discretion-the standard ordinarily applicable to review of evidentiary rulings-is the proper standard by which to review a district court's decision to admit or exclude expert scientific evidence. | |
Court membership | |
| |
Case opinions | |
Majority | Rehnquist, joined by unanimous (parts I, II); O'Connor, Scalia, Kennedy, Souter, Thomas, Ginsburg, Breyer (part III) |
Concurrence | Breyer |
Concur/dissent | Stevens |
Laws applied | |
Federal Rules of Evidence |
General Electric Co. v. Joiner, 522 U.S. 136 (1997), was a Supreme Court of the United States case between Robert Joiner and General Electric Co. that concerned whether the abuse of discretion standard is the correct standard an appellate court should apply in reviewing a trial court's decision to admit or exclude expert testimony.[1] The case is notable for helping articulate the Daubert standard.