The Supreme Court determined 12/15/97 that an appellate court should use the "abuse-of-discretion" standard to review a trial court's decision to admit or exclude expert testimony under Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993). In so doing, the Court reversed an Eleventh Circuit opinion applying a particularly stringent standard when reviewing the exclusion of expert testimony. Applying the proper standard of review here, the Court held that the District Court did not abuse its discretion in excluding scientific evidence when it determined that the studies upon which the experts relied were insufficient to support the experts' conclusions.The NAM filed an amicus brief in this case, arguing that trial courts are best situated and fully capable of fulfilling their roles as gatekeepers with respect to the admission of evidence in trials, and that it is an unnecessary waste of time and resources for appellate courts to revisit these determinations as if taking a first look at the matter.