LOS ANGELES — Domino’s Pizza LLC is required to bring its website into compliance with federal accessibility guidelines, a California federal judge ruled in a June 23 in chambers order, granting partial summary judgment to a blind man who sued the pizza chain for violating the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA.)
LEXINGTON, Ky. — A Kentucky federal judge on July 13 granted one motion to exclude an expert retained to value the replacement cost of a piece of equipment destroyed during an accident at a construction site, finding that he didn’t base his conclusions on reliable methodology, but allowed another to testify after finding that his conclusions were reliable.
PHILADELPHIA — An expert opining on the origins of a house fire meets the standards set in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc., a Pennsylvania federal judge ruled July 8, denying a manufacturer’s motion to exclude in a subrogation action filed by the homeowners’ insurer.
PADUCAH, Ky. — A Kentucky federal judge on July 16 agreed to limit testimony from a liability expert retained by a man who claims that he was injured while working on a river towing vessel after finding that some of his proposed testimony does not meet the standards set in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc.
WILMINGTON, Del. — A doctor who performed spinal surgery on a woman claiming injuries after a slip and fall inside a Walmart store is qualified to testify during the trial on the causation of her hip and spinal injuries, a Delaware state judge ruled July 16, denying the company’s motion to exclude.
PHILADELPHIA — Medical experts opining on the likelihood that a man injured after falling off a ladder can return to work may testify in a lawsuit against the manufacturer, a federal judge in Pennsylvania ruled July 15, but the judge reserved ruling on the admissibility of many of the conclusions the company’s engineering expert reached until closer to trial.
KNOXVILLE, Tenn. — An insurer involved in a disputed claim for property damage caused by a wildfire lost its bid to exclude two experts retained to testify on the scope of the damage and costs associated with the repairs after a Tennessee federal judge on July 15 found that the experts are qualified and based their conclusion on reliable information.
ROANOKE, Va. — Dueling experts opining on the necessity of a spinal surgery for a woman injured in a motor-vehicle accident will both be allowed to testify, a Virginia federal judge ruled June 22, but the judge barred one expert from mentioning a previous suicide attempt, finding that the information would be unduly prejudicial.
INDIANAPOLIS — An Indiana appeals court on July 14 found that a trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying a motion to exclude expert witnesses in a wrongful death suit but did agree to limit one expert in light of a previous partial summary judgment award.
ANCHORAGE, Alaska — A woman proposing a class action lawsuit against a clothing company failed in her efforts to stop a law professor retained as an expert witness by the company from testifying after an Alaska federal judge on July 13 denied her motion to exclude,
SYRACUSE, N.Y. — A use-of-force expert may testify on standard police policies and whether officers accused of using excessive force during an arrest deviated from those standards, but he may not opine on the reasonableness of the officers’ actions or their state of mind because that testimony would usurp the role of the jury, a federal magistrate judge in New York ruled July 1.
LOUISVILLE, Ky. — Finding “serious shortcomings” in an expert’s report prepared for man who claims that Costco is at fault for a fall from a wheelchair outside of its store, a Kentucky federal judge on June 16 granted the wholesale club’s motion to exclude his testimony and awarded summary judgment.
PHILADELPHIA — Calculations on lost front pay and tuition remission “rest on assumptions unsupported by the factual record and are therefore unreliable,” a Pennsylvania federal judge said July 7, partially granting a motion to exclude an economic damages expert who was retained by a fired employee in a wrongful termination suit.
MEMPHIS, Tenn. — A Tennessee federal judge on July 12 denied a motion to exclude a life-care planning expert from testifying on what future medical expenses a man involved in a rear-end collision may require and ruled that the expert was qualified and reliable under Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc..
HAMMOND, Ind. — A podiatrist testifying for a casino owner in a slip-and-fall case may not opine on whether an injury not clearly stated in a woman’s medical record led to her leg amputation, a federal magistrate judge in Indiana said July 7; however, he ruled that objections to the woman’s expert boil down to “general disputes as to the methodologies” and are not grounds for exclusion.
SAN JOSE, Calif. — A California magistrate federal judge on June 21 limited testimony from an expert retained by a school district to rebut a parents’ expert who opines that their child suffers from posttraumatic stress disorder as a result of being abused by one of his teachers, finding that challenges to exclude based on failure to comply with disclosure rules are unsuccessful but that the expert cannot base her testimony on consultations with other experts.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — U.S. Supreme Court review of a Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruling affirming the conviction of a doctor for his alleged involvement in a health care fraud scheme is necessary to address whether Medicare “rules, regulations and policies” are “controlling” in a criminal prosecution, a doctor argues in a petition for writ of certiorari filed June 3 in the Supreme Court.
WITCHITA, Kan. — A Kansas federal judge on June 3 ruled on four motions to exclude under Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc., excluding testimony from a commercial vehicle expert, denying without prejudice a motion on video reenactment of the accident, limiting what a life-care expert can opine on and dismissing efforts to exclude a vocational expert.
WITCHITA, Kan. — A Kansas federal judge on June 4 denied dueling motions to exclude four expert witnesses in a breach of contract case involving a retirement agreement, finding that the experts will testify to matters in dispute and that their testimony is relevant and reliable and will assist the trier of fact.
ORLANDO, Fla. — An adjuster who opined that damage to a roof was caused by a storm does not meet the standards for an expert witness under Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc., a federal judge in Florida ruled June 14 and granted summary judgment to the insurer after finding that a couple could not prove their claim.