Plaintiff was diagnosed with a form of asthma which was allegedly tied to work he did for the defendant. Plaintiff hired occupational medicine expert and defendant filed a motion to exclude said expert. The court denied the motion to exclude
Insects & Pests Expert Witness Testimony Excluded
Plaintiffs filed a class action against defendants related to the effectiveness of their pest control products. Plaintiff hired an insects & pests expert witness to provide testimony. The defendants filed a motion to exclude. The court granted the motion.
Cardiology Expert Witness Allowed in Insurance Fraud Case
Plaintiff hired cardiology expert to opine on medical tests and procedures in his field. Defendant filed a motion to exclude this testimony. The court allowed the testimony to proceed.
Two out of Three Expert Witnesses Allowed in Contract Dispute Litigation
In this contract dispute case, the defendant and plaintiff hired expert witnesses to help with their case. Two out of the three expert testimony was granted.
Two out of Three Experts in Medical Malpractice Case Allowed to Testify
In this medical malpractice case involving colon cancer, the plaintiff hired three expert witnesses. All but one was excluded from testifying.
District Court Opinion Denying Healthcare Expert is Affirmed
Plaintiff appealed an opinion of the district court excluding the testimony of his standard of care expert. The appeals court affirmed the opinion.
Fire Expert Witness Partially Allowed
Plaintiff sued defendant for negligence in the design of a toaster that caught on fire, causing the death of the owner. The plaintiff hired an expert to assist in his case, and a motion to exclude was denied in part and granted in part
Five Expert Witnesses Allowed in Healthcare Benefits Fraud Case
This case involves healthcare benefits fraud. The Government and the Defendants both hired expert witnesses to assist with their arguments. Both filed motions to exclude, but the court denied both motions.
Labor Economics Expert Witness Testimony Allowed
Class action plaintiffs hired a labor economics expert witness to testify on their behalf. The defendants filed a motion to exclude, which was denied
Daubert Shorts – Recent Opinions on Expert Witness Testimony
Below are a few recent opinions on the admissibility of expert witness testimony.
- Serrano et al v. American Airlines, Inc. – United States District Court – Southern District of Florida – November 8th, 2016 – This case involves injuries sustained by the plaintiff (Serrano) when she attempted to disembark from a plane via a mobile stairway. Serrano sued the defendant (American Airlines) as the cause of her injuries and hired Paul M. Getty (Forensic Engineering Expert Witness). Getty opined that Serrano fell on a partially lifted, lower stairway during the decent. In addition, he has criticized the record keeping about the event. American Airlines filed a motion to exclude Getty’s testimony, stating that his opinions are unreliable or unhelpful to the jury. The court agreed, stating that Getty’s observations about two possible stairway models is not disputed and would not assist the jury. In addition, he did not perform any testing or consult any relevant publications to reach his conclusions. In addition, his thoughts on American Airlines’s record keeping are unreliable as there is no evidence to support his conclusions. The court thus ruled that his testimony would not be allowed.
- Global One Engineering, LLC v. SiteMaster, Inc. – United States District Court – Northern District of Oklahoma – October 31st, 2016 – In this contract dispute involving a construction project, the plaintiff (Global One) hired Michael Berryman as a construction expert witness. The defendant (SiteMaster) filed a motion to exclude the testimony of Mr. Berryman arguing that he does not have the necessary qualifications. SiteMaster contends that Mr. Berryman does not have the knowledge, skill, or experience in the standards established by the Society for Protective Coatings (SSPC). GlobalOne argues that Mr. Berryman’s testimony is not intended to establish that their work met the SSPC standards. The court agreed with the Global One, denying SiteMasters motion to exclude.