U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, 1998

Joiner v. General Electric Co.

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Decided February 9, 1998 · Barkett, Birch, Smith

134 F.3d 1457 (Federal Reporter, Third Series)

Counsel

Michael J. Warshauer, Burge & Wetter-mark, Atlanta, GA, Kenneth J. Chesebro, Cambridge, MA, for Plaintiffs-Appellants., Anthony L. Cochran, Chilivis & Grindler, Atlanta, GA, David H. Flint, Alexander Jackson Simmons, Jr., Sehreeder, Wheeler & Flint, Atlanta, GA, Joseph Claude Freeman, Jr., Joanne Beauvoir Brown, Atlanta, GA, Steven R. Kuney, William & Connolly, Washington, DC, for Defendants-Appellees.

Cases that cite this one

1 later published case cites this decision.

Joiner v. General Electric (11th Cir. 1998)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM:

On December 15,1997, the Supreme Court reversed the judgment of the panel in this case reversing the district court’s exclusion of plaintiffs expert testimony and grant of summary judgment. General Electric Co. v. Joiner, — U.S. -, 118 S.Ct. 512, 139 L.Ed.2d 508 (1997). However, the Supreme Court noted that genuine issues of material fact still preclude summary judgment in this case. Specifically, the Supreme Court stated that:

Whether Joiner was exposed to furans and dioxins, and whether if there was such exposure, the opinions of Joiner’s experts would then be admissible, remain open questions. We accordingly reverse the judgment of the Court of Appeals and remand this ease for proceedings consistent with this opinion.

Id. at-, 118 S.Ct. at 519.

Accordingly, we REMAND this case to the district court for further proceedings consistent with the Supreme Court’s decision and order.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.