expert had worked for ten years at Michelin. The fact that visual inspection of tires was generally a reliable method wasn't an issue either, because the issue before the court was specific to the tire on the Carmichaels' van. But the expert said that his inspection of the tire led to the conclusion that a defect caused the tire to explode because he did not see evidence of other causes. "Nothing in either Daubert or the Federal Rules of Evidence requires a district court to admit opinion evidence that is connected to existing data only by the ipse dixit'' of the expert [i.e., only by the statement of the expert himself]." The district court acted within its discretion to exclude the evidence proffered by the tire expert in light of these concerns. Accordingly, the Supreme Court reversed the Eleventh Circuit's decision to overrule the district court. See also List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 526 List of United States Supreme Court cases Lists of United States Supreme Court cases by volume External links Northwestern University School of Journalism Brief of the Solicitor General Amicus Brief, Washington Legal Foundation United States expert witness case law Federal Rules of Evidence case law United States Supreme Court cases United States Supreme Court cases of the Rehnquist Court Tires 1999 in United States case law Kumho Asiana Group