FORT MYERS, Fla. — Efforts by Walmart to exclude an expert witness in a slip-and-fall case failed May 3 after a Florida federal judge found that a man’s treating physician is a nonretained expert and meets the admissibility standard set in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc.
NEW ORLEANS — A federal judge in Louisiana on April 30 denied two motions to exclude an expert witness on automatic doors retained by a woman who alleges that a malfunctioning door at a Lowe’s store caused serious injuries.
MIAMI — A federal magistrate judge in Florida on May 6 filed a report recommending that the judge overseeing a case in which a woman claims that she faced discrimination based on her military status deny her former employer’s motion to exclude her expert witness, finding that factual assumptions at this stage of the case do not necessitate exclusion of a witness.
TAMPA, Fla. — Proposed testimony from dueling expert witnesses on whether a woman’s motorcycle helmet came off during a crash met different fates on May 7 when a Florida federal judge ruled that the woman’s expert did not use reliable methodology when concluding that her helmet fell off during the crash but that the defendants’ expert met the reliability standard set under Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc.
TRENTON, N.J. — Unsupported expert testimony that non-asbestiform cleavage fragments cause mesothelioma warrants retrying a case that produced a $117 million asbestos-talc verdict, a New Jersey appeals court said April 28.
TROY, Mich. — The Michigan Court of Appeals on May 6 affirmed summary judgment for a doctor in a medical malpractice lawsuit, agreeing with the trial court that the expert witness offered by a woman claiming an injury during a surgery failed to establish that his standard of care testimony was based on reliable methods.
INDIANAPOLIS — Experts on dog handling can testify in a suit in which a man accuses a city police force of violating his rights after he was attacked by a police dog, a Indiana federal magistrate judge ruled April 20 after finding that the two experts meet the relevance and reliability standards set in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc.
EAST ST. LOUIS, Ill. — An Illinois federal judge on May 3 refused to reconsider an order excluding a former employee’s expert report from a proposed class action over a sandwich chain franchisor’s contractual no-poach agreement, finding that the former employee’s motion did not demonstrate “a manifest error of law or fact” that would warrant reconsideration.
ATLANTA — An 11th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel on April 22 reversed summary judgment in a da Vinci surgical robot case, finding that a trial judge erred in excluding the plaintiff’s sole expert as a nonuser of the device and remanding the case with instructions for the district court chief judge to reassign the case due to a conflict of interest with the original trial judge.
NEW YORK — A couple that maintains that E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co. caused the husband to develop cancer filed a reply brief on April 5 in the Second Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals contending that the opinions of his expert are “the epitome of reliability” under U.S. Supreme Court precedent and federal rules because they “they go no further” than findings reached by federal investigators that were published in peer-reviewed scientific literature.
AUSTIN, Texas — A federal magistrate judge in Texas on April 29 denied a motion to exclude expert witnesses filed by a man alleging injuries in a car crash, finding that both experts are qualified under Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc.
DENVER — The 10th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on April 22 ruled that a lower court did not abuse its discretion in excluding an expert witness retained by a man who was injured while operating a forklift, affirming summary judgment for the manufacturer.
BOSTON — The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court on April 20 reversed an assault conviction, remanding the case for a new trial, after finding that the lower court erred in excluding an expert witness who would opine that the victim’s tattoo was affiliated with white supremacist groups.
CHICAGO — A federal judge in Illinois on April 16 trimmed a large portion of claims brought by a couple who accused a builder of breaching the terms of the sales agreement and violating the Illinois Consumer Fraud Act (ICFA) when constructing their home, finding that triable issues existed only as to whether NVR Inc. breached the sales agreement by installing allegedly improper floor framing and whether it violated the ICFA by installing wood veneer cabinets rather than cabinets made from solid wood.
JACKSONVILLE, Fla. — A motion to certify a class of Chili’s patrons affected by a 2018 data breach was partly granted on April 14, with a Florida federal judge certifying a nationwide class for only a negligence claim brought against the restaurant chain’s owner.
DENVER — A man who alleges that he was seriously injured because of a design defect in a pickup truck that caused it to roll over lost his appeal on April 13 when the 10th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals found that a district court properly excluded his expert witnesses and granted summary judgment to Ford Motor Co.
NEW ORLEANS — A Louisiana federal judge on April 8 denied one motion to exclude expert testimony and partially granted another in a dispute related to delays and expenses accrued during construction of a hotel.
LOS ANGELES — A California judge overseeing the state’s coordinated incretin mimetics litigation on April 6 excluded the testimony of the plaintiffs’ four experts and, leaving them with no means to prove that the defendants’ diabetes drugs cause pancreatitis or pancreatic cancer and leaving them facing summary judgment.
ROANOKE, Va. — A Virginia federal judge on April 8 ruled on motions to strike expert witnesses that a woman who was injured in a collision with a tractor-trailer owned by Walmart Transportation claims are rebuttal witnesses, with the judge allowing one expert, striking another and taking the decision on a third under advisement.
OMAHA, Neb. — A federal judge in Nebraska on April 1 denied a railroad company’s motions to exclude two expert witnesses in a Federal Employers Liability Act (FELA) case alleging that exposure to toxins led to fatal lung cancer, finding that the experts meet the threshold established by Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc.