Legal Opinion

Tumlinson v. Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.

Supreme Court of Delaware

Decided August 16, 2013No. 672, 2012PublishedCited by 19 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

STEELE, Chief Justice:

In this action, a group of Texas plaintiffs allege that a corporation exposed two employees to chemicals that caused two of the employees’ children to suffer from birth defects. On appeal, the plaintiffs challenge a Superior Court judge’s application of Texas substantive law and the resulting exclusion of expert testimony. Under Delaware law, which incorporates the United States Supreme Court’s holding in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.,1 admissible expert testimony must be both relevant and reliable. The Superior Court judge excluded the expert testimony as…

2Cases cited23 opinions

  1. Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1993
  2. Kumho Tire Co. v. CarmichaelSupreme Court of the United States · 1999
  3. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. HavnerTexas Supreme Court · 1997
  4. Clinton v. Enterprise Rent-A-Car Co.Supreme Court of Delaware · 2009
  5. M.G. Bancorporation, Inc. v. Le BeauSupreme Court of Delaware · 1999

18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. Tumlinson v. Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.Supreme Court of Delaware · 2013
  2. Lum v. StateSupreme Court of Delaware · 2014
  3. Schultz v. Sinav Ltd.Appellate Court of Illinois · 2024
  4. Schultz v. Sinav Ltd.Appellate Court of Illinois · 2024
  5. Alex Brola v. Christopher LundgrenCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 2025

14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API