Articles Posted in Daubert Shorts

1. Mm Steel, LP v. JSW Steel (USA), Inc – United States Court of Appeals For The Fifth Circuit – November 25th, 2015 – This is an appeal of a district court opinion related to the Sherman Act and the steel industry.  The plaintiff’s claim that the steel distributors formed an illegal conspiracy to deprive them of steel.  The defendants appealed a jury trial order of $150 million dollars in damages.  Part of the appeal involved the Daubert motion by the defendants to exclude the economics expert witness, Stephen P Magee, hired by the plaintiffs.  The appeals court denied this part of the appeal.
2. Nettleson et al v. Ford Motor Company – United States District Court – Northern District of California – November 25th, 2015 – This case involves an alleged design defect in the backlight on the rear liftgate of certain automobiles.  The defect would cause an “ejection portal” through which people and objects might fly.  Each party called numerous experts, which were subsequently challenged.  The plaintiff’s hired the following experts: Henry Chamberlain (a glass expert witness), Don Phillips (Accident Reconstruction & Safety Expert Witness), Carl Locke, Ph.D (Metallurgy Expert Witnesses), and Richard Hixenbaugh (Automobile Appraisal Expert Witness).  The defendant called Diane Wood, Ph.D (Behavioral Science Expert Witness).  The court granted the motion to exclude the testimony of all of these experts and granted summary judgment in favor of the defendant.
3. John Lee Taylor vs Seketa Culver – Court of Appeal of Florida – First District – December 1st, 2015 – In this personal injury action arising out of a automobile collision, the appellant maintains that the lower court improperly excluded her biomechanics expert witness.  The appeals court agreed and reversed the opinion.

1. ALBERT E. GUCKER Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES STEEL CORPORATION – United States District Court – Western District of Pennsylvania – November 23rd 2015 – This is an employment discrimination case for violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, and the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act.  The defendant filed a motion to exclude the testimony of Donal F. Kirwan, a human resources expert witness.  The court denied the motion.
2. Gill v. State Farm Lloyds – United States District Court – Eastern District of Texas – November 23rd, 2015 – This case involves an insurance coverage dispute over damage to a residence after a wind and hail storm.  The plaintiff hired Steven Richardson, a construction expert witness and the defendant challenged based on qualification and reliability.  The motion was denied by the court.
3. State of Minnesota v. Jason DeWayne Kirk – State of Minnesota Court of Appeals – November 23rd, 2015 – The defendant in this case appeals a conviction of first-degree criminal sexual conduct.  He states that the trial court improperly excluded the testimony of his sanity/trial competency expert witness Dr. Deborah Davis, who was called to testify on false confessions.  The appeals court affirms the opinion of the lower court.

1. Bickham v. Coca Cola Refreshments USA, Inc. – United States District Court – Southern District of New York – November 18th, 2015 – This case involves a negligence claim against Coca Cola related to an object allegedly swallowed during the ingestion of a soft drink. The plaintiff hired Darrel Suderman, Ph.D., a food expert witness.  The defendant filed a motion to exclude this testimony and the court granted the motion.
2. Aide Sepulveda Torres v. Carnival Corporation – United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit – November 20th, 2015 – This is an alleged negligence action stemming from a fall on a cruise ship.  The plaintiff sued the defendant for negligence in Florida Southern District Court and hired Kevin Rider, a human-factors engineering expert witness.  The defense filed a motion to exclude Mr. Rider’s testimony, which was granted, along with summart judgment in favor of the defendant.  The plaintiff appealed to this court and the appeals court affirmed the lower court opinion.
3. Vaughn v. Safeway, Inc. – United States District Court – District of Colorado – November 20th, 2015 – This is an employment discrimination case.  The plaintiff has sued his employer stating that they have discriminated against him in violation of the American with Disabilities Act (ADA).  In order to assist in their case, the plaintiff has hired Rita Laitres a human resources expert witness, which was subsequently challenged by the defendant.  They state that her opinion is not reliable, she is not qualified, and her testimony will not assist the trier of fact.  The court denied the motion to exclude.

1. Bruska v. Bunting Bearings – United States District Court – District of Minnesota – November 17th, 2015 – In this products liability case involving automobile brakes, the defendants’ challenge the expert witness testimony of James Brusso, a metallurgy expert witnesses.  They argue that his testimony is unreliable, over speculative and not based on reliable data.  The court disagreed and denied the motion.
2. Nester et al v. Textron, Inc. et al – United States District Court – Western District of Texas – November 17th, 2015 – This is a personal injury/products liability case involving a Workhorse cart.  The plaintiffs claim that the vehicle malfunctioned and caused injury to Ms. Nester.  Expert witnesses were called by both parties.   The defendants have moved to exclude thetestimony of Dr. William Vigilante (Human Factors Engineering Expert Witness), Herbert Newbold (Mechanical Engineering Expert Witness), and Dr. Lara McKenzie (personal injury expert witness).  Plaintiffs have moved to exclude the evidence of Dr. David Bizzak (Mechanical Engineering Expert Witness).  The court opined as follows:  Denied in part and granted in part the motion to exclude the testimonies of Dr. Lara McKenzie, Herbert Newbold, and Dr. David Bizzak.  The court denied in full the motion to exclude the testimony of Dr. William Vigilante.
3. Scottsdale Ins. Co. v. Deere & Co – United States District Court – District of Kansas – November 16th, 2015 – This case involves a combine that caught fire while harvesting wheat.  Scottsdale Insurance Company, the subrogee for the owners of the combine filed a lawsuit against John Deere, the maker of the combine.  Scottsdale filed a motion to exclude the expert witness testimony of Michael Senneff and Josh Oltrogge, both fire expert witnesses.  The court denied in part and granted the motion in part.

A summary of recent Daubert opinions.

1. Ponce v. Mountaineers – Court of Appeals of Washington – Division One – November 2, 2015 – This case involves a sledding accident.  The plaintiffs appeal a lower court opinion which allowed the defendant’s sports and recreation expert witness, Chris Stoddard.  They claim that he lacked sufficient foundation.  The appeals court confirmed the lower court opinion.
2. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation v. Attorneys Title Insurance Fund, Inc. – United States District Court – Middle District of Florida – November 4th, 2015 – In this title insurance fund related to residential loan transactions, the defendant filed a motion to exclude the testimony of J. Richard Harris, a mortgages expert witness.   The defense stated that the Mr. Harris does not employ a reliable methodology and that his testimony would not help the trier of fact.  The court denied the motion.

1. Terrebonne Parish NAACP et al v. Jindal et al – United States District Court – Middle District of Louisiana – October 18th, 2015 – This case involves at-large voting in a judicial district in Louisiana, possibly violating the Voting Rights Act of 1965.  The defendants hired three experts to assist in proving their case and the plaintiffs filed motions to exclude them.  The experts are Bruce L. Adelson (government expert witness), Michael Beychik (political consultant expert witness), and Ronald E. Weber (redistricting and voting rights expert witness).  The court granted the motion to exclude Mr. Adelson and deferred an opinion on the motions to exclude the latter two experts.
2. Stachon v. Woodward et al – United States District Court – Northern District of Indiana – October 23rd, 2015 – In this motor vehicle action, the defendant hired Michael Sutton as an accident reconstruction expert witness.  The plaintiff challenged his testimony stating that his testimony was outside of his expertise, unreliable, and would not assist the trier of fact.  The motion to exclude the testimony was denied.
3. Trustees of Boston University v. Everlight Electronics Co., Ltd. et al – United States District Court – District of Massachusetts – October 23rd, 2015 –  In this patent infringement case, the court issued three separate opinions (here, here, and here) related to motions to exclude expert witness testimony.  The first and second involve, Alan Ratliff, a business evaluation expert witness.  The third opinion involves Russell W. Mangum III, an economics expert witness.  The court granted in part and denied in part the testimonies of both Mr. Ratliff, and Dr.. Mangum.

1. Dillon v. Auto-Owners Insurance Company – United States District Court – District of Colorado – October 21st, 2015 – In this case involving an automobile accident, the plaintiff filed suit against defendant’s insurance company.  The defendant seeks to exclude the testimony of Neuropsychology expert witness Janet Lemon, Phd on causation grounds.  The judge denied the motion to exclude.
2. Lion Oil Company v. National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, PA et al – United States District Court – District Court of Arkansas – October 20th, 2015 – The defendants in this case seek to exclude the testimony of: Kevin O’Toole (forensic accounting expert witness), William Byrd (pipelines expert witness), and  Dr. Ashok Saxena (mechanical engineering expert witness).  The court denied the motion to exclude the testimony of Kevin O’Toole, denied Mr. Byrd from using the undisclosed parts of this testimony, and denied as moot the testimony of Dr, Saxena.
3. Cave et al v. Saxon Mortgage Services Inc, et al – United States District Court – District of Pennsylvania – October 20th, 2015 – This is a contract case related to mortgages and consumer lending.  The plaintiffs seek to exclude the expert witness testimony of Marsha J. Courchane, Ph.D, a mortgages expert witness stating that she improperly offered a legal opinion.  The court granted the motion in part and denied the motion in part.

• Century Indemnity Company v. The Marine Group, LLC et al – United States District Court – District of Oregon – October 13th, 2015 – In this environmental cleanup case, the testimony of insurance expert witnesses Robert Hughes and Dennis Connolly were challenged on grounds of inadmissible legal conclusions and qualifications.  The court granted the motion regarding the legal conclusions, but denied the motion regarding qualifications.
• Scott Bridge Company, Inc. v. Gresham Smith and Partners – United States District Court – Middle District of Alabama – October 14th, 2015 – In this negligence action involving the design and construction of a deep water pier, the testimony of three experts were challenged. These experts include: Dane Floyd (forensic accounting expert witness), Ben D. Nolan, III (mechanical engineering expert witnesses), Dr. Ted Thomson (structural engineering expert witnesses), and Dr. Richard Hartman.
• Aubrey et al v. Barlin et al – United States District Court – Western District of Texas – October 14th, 2015 – This case involves an alleged Ponzi scheme related to land developments.  The plaintiffs called Edmond Martin as a forensic accounting expert witness.  The defendants challenged on the grounds of qualification, reliability, and that his testimony would not help the jury.  The court granted the motion in part and denied it in part.