Showing results 1-2 of 2.
Cases using phrasing similar to:
"Based upon these findings, Dr. Wing concludes that the increases are "consistent with allegations that the magnitude of radiation doses from the TMI accident were much higher than was assumed in the past.""
District Court Decision: Excluded
Appellate Court Decision: Affirmed
Accordingly, before proceeding with our discussion of the District Court's application of Daubert to the expert testimony that was offered to prove that TMI-2 released radiation that caused the Trial Plaintiffs' neoplasms we will briefly discuss the operation of a nuclear power plant in an effort to better determine if Trial Plaintiffs proffered sufficient evidence to connect their injuries to the nuclear reactions that took place inside the nuclear generator at TMI-2. ... Defendants challenged the admissibility of the experts' testimony and the District Court was therefore required to hold extensive in limine hearings pursuant to its "gatekeeping" role under Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579, 113 S.Ct. 2786, 125 L.Ed.2d 469 (1993).Nuclear physics Radioactivity Particle physics Nuclear technology Nuclear chemistry
In January and April of this year, the court issued a series of Daubert rulings excluding the bulk of Plaintiffs' expert scientific testimony as scientifically unreliable. ... cf. Ambrosini v. Upjohn Co., 1995 WL 637650 at *1 n. 1 (D.D.C. October 18, 1995) ("The [District of Columbia] Court of Appeals has stressed that the admissibility of an expert's opinion is `separate and distinct from the issue whether the testimony is sufficient to withstand a motion for summary judgment.'"