In Re TMI Litigation, No. 96-7623

CourtUnited States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (3rd Circuit)
Citation199 F.3d 158
Docket NumberNo. 96-7625,No. 96-7624,Nos. 96-7623,No. 96-7623
Parties(3rd Cir. 1999) IN RE: TMI LITIGATION LORI DOLAN; JOSEPH GAUGHAN; RONALD WARD; ESTATE OF PEARL HICKERNELL; KENNETH PUTT; ESTATE OF ETHELDA HILT; PAULA OBERCASH; JOLENE PETERSON; ESTATE OF GARY VILLELLA; ESTATE OF LEO BEAM, Appellants IN RE: TMI LITIGATION ALL PLAINTIFFS EXCEPT LORI DOLAN, JOSEPH GAUGHAN, RONALD WARD, ESTATE OF PEARL HICKERNELL, KENNETH PUTT, ESTATE OF ETHELDA HILT, PAULA OBERCASH, JOLENE PETERSON, ESTATE OF GARY VILLELLA AND ESTATE OF LEO BEAM, Appellants IN RE: TMI LITIGATION ALL PLAINTIFFS; ARNOLD LEVIN; LAURENCE BERMAN; LEE SWARTZ, Appellants/96-7624/96-7625
Decision Date04 January 2000

Page 158

199 F.3d 158 (3rd Cir. 1999)
IN RE: TMI LITIGATION
LORI DOLAN; JOSEPH GAUGHAN; RONALD WARD; ESTATE OF PEARL HICKERNELL; KENNETH PUTT; ESTATE OF ETHELDA HILT; PAULA OBERCASH; JOLENE PETERSON; ESTATE OF GARY VILLELLA; ESTATE OF LEO BEAM, Appellants No. 96-7623
IN RE: TMI LITIGATION
ALL PLAINTIFFS EXCEPT LORI DOLAN, JOSEPH GAUGHAN, RONALD WARD, ESTATE OF PEARL HICKERNELL, KENNETH PUTT, ESTATE OF ETHELDA HILT, PAULA OBERCASH, JOLENE PETERSON, ESTATE OF GARY VILLELLA AND ESTATE OF LEO BEAM, Appellants No. 96-7624
IN RE: TMI LITIGATION
ALL PLAINTIFFS; ARNOLD LEVIN; LAURENCE BERMAN; LEE SWARTZ, Appellants No. 96-7625
Nos. 96-7623/96-7624/96-7625
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
January 4, 2000

ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA. District Judge: Honorable Sylvia H. Rambo.

Before: GREENBERG and McKEE, Circuit Judges, and GREENAWAY, District Judge.*

ORDER AMENDING OPINION

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, that the Slip Opinion filed in this case on November 2, 1999 (193 F.3d 613), be amended as follows:

On page 85 (193 F.3d at 665), at the conclusion of the sentence, "With the parameters of our inquiry in mind of our review in mind, the teachings of Daubert and the aforementioned scientific principles as our guideposts, we can now proceed to apply yardstick

Page 159

of Daubert to the expert opinions at issue here and determine if they were properly excluded under the Rules of Evidence.." insert as footnote number 93 the following text:

Our recent holding in Padillas v. Stork-Gamco, Inc., 186 F.3d 412 (3d Cir. 1999), does not assist our inquiry. In Padillas, the defendant moved for summary judgment, arguing that the plaintiff's expert's report did not meet Daubert standards for admissibility. The District Court excluded the expert's report and granted summary judgment to the defendant without an in limine hearing. We reversed and remanded for an in limine hearing.

We were concerned with the process the District Court must generally use in exercising its gatekeeping role under Daubert. We noted that "[w]e have long stressed the importance of in limine hearings under Rule 104(a) in making the reliability determination required under Rule 702 and Daubert." Id. at 417 (quoting United States v. Downing, 753 F.2d 1224, 1241 (3d Cir. 1985); In Re Paoli Railroad yard PCB Litigation, 916 F.2d 829, 854 (3d Cir. 1990)("Paoli I"); and Hines v. Consolidated Rail Corp., 926 F.2d 262,...

To continue reading

Request your trial
113 practice notes
  • Estate of Thomas v. Fayette Cnty., 2:14-cv-00551
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 3th Circuit. United States District Courts. 3th Circuit. Western District of Pennsylvania
    • July 8, 2016
    ...not on the conclusions generated by the principles and methodology." In re TMI Litig. , 193 F.3d 613, 665 (3d Cir.1999)amended , 199 F.3d 158 (3d Cir.2000). See also Kumho Tire Co. v. Carmichael, 526 U.S. 137, 150, 119 S.Ct. 1167, 143 L.Ed.2d 238 (1999) ( "[The objective] is to make certain......
  • Soldo v. Sandoz Pharmaceuticals Corp., No. CIV.A.98-1712.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Western District of Pennsylvania
    • January 13, 2003
    ...under the standards of Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharm., 509 U.S. 579, 592, 113 S.Ct. 2786, 125 L.Ed.2d 469 (1993); In re TMI Litig., 199 F.3d 158, 159 (3d Cir. 2000) (citations 20. While the Court has engaged in its own independent analysis regarding the admissibility of plaintiffs experts' t......
  • Bracco Diagnostics, Inc. v. Amersham Health, Inc., Civil Action No. 03-6025.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 3th Circuit. United States District Courts. 3th Circuit. District of New Jersey
    • March 25, 2009
    ...through interviews conducted by nonprofessionals aligned with counsel. In re TMI Litig., 193 F.3d 613, 698 (3d Cir. 1999), amended by, 199 F.3d 158 (3d Cir. 2000). However, In re TMI Litig. is not analogous to the present case because Dr. Schmittlein's and Dr. Stewart's analyses were not ba......
  • In re Young Broadcasting Inc., No. 09-10645 (AJG).
    • United States
    • United States Bankruptcy Courts. Second Circuit. U.S. Bankruptcy Court — Southern District of New York
    • April 19, 2010
    ...is based on valid reasoning and reliable methodology.'" In re TMI Litigation, 193 F.3d 613, 665 (3d Cir.1999), amended on other grounds, 199 F.3d 158 (2000), cert. denied, 530 U.S. 1225, 120 S.Ct. 2238, 147 L.Ed.2d 266 (2000) (quoting Kannankeril v. Terminix Int'l Inc., 128 F.3d 802, 806 (3......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
111 cases
  • Estate of Thomas v. Fayette Cnty., 2:14-cv-00551
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 3th Circuit. United States District Courts. 3th Circuit. Western District of Pennsylvania
    • July 8, 2016
    ...not on the conclusions generated by the principles and methodology." In re TMI Litig. , 193 F.3d 613, 665 (3d Cir.1999)amended , 199 F.3d 158 (3d Cir.2000). See also Kumho Tire Co. v. Carmichael, 526 U.S. 137, 150, 119 S.Ct. 1167, 143 L.Ed.2d 238 (1999) ( "[The objective] is to make certain......
  • Soldo v. Sandoz Pharmaceuticals Corp., No. CIV.A.98-1712.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Western District of Pennsylvania
    • January 13, 2003
    ...under the standards of Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharm., 509 U.S. 579, 592, 113 S.Ct. 2786, 125 L.Ed.2d 469 (1993); In re TMI Litig., 199 F.3d 158, 159 (3d Cir. 2000) (citations 20. While the Court has engaged in its own independent analysis regarding the admissibility of plaintiffs experts' t......
  • Bracco Diagnostics, Inc. v. Amersham Health, Inc., Civil Action No. 03-6025.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 3th Circuit. United States District Courts. 3th Circuit. District of New Jersey
    • March 25, 2009
    ...through interviews conducted by nonprofessionals aligned with counsel. In re TMI Litig., 193 F.3d 613, 698 (3d Cir. 1999), amended by, 199 F.3d 158 (3d Cir. 2000). However, In re TMI Litig. is not analogous to the present case because Dr. Schmittlein's and Dr. Stewart's analyses were not ba......
  • In re Young Broadcasting Inc., No. 09-10645 (AJG).
    • United States
    • United States Bankruptcy Courts. Second Circuit. U.S. Bankruptcy Court — Southern District of New York
    • April 19, 2010
    ...is based on valid reasoning and reliable methodology.'" In re TMI Litigation, 193 F.3d 613, 665 (3d Cir.1999), amended on other grounds, 199 F.3d 158 (2000), cert. denied, 530 U.S. 1225, 120 S.Ct. 2238, 147 L.Ed.2d 266 (2000) (quoting Kannankeril v. Terminix Int'l Inc., 128 F.3d 802, 806 (3......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT