PHOENIX — An Arizona federal judge on Oct. 12 said conclusions about maritime safety practices require specialized knowledge and denied a tour boat company’s motion to exclude testimony from an expert retained by a woman who alleges that a boat’s wake caused her to damage her back.
ATLANTA — The testimony of a medical doctor who opined that a veteran’s treating physician violated the standard of care does not pass muster under Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc., and without his testimony, the claims against the federal government fail, a Georgia federal judge ruled Sept 20, granting a motion to exclude and awarding summary judgment.
BENTON, Ill. — An Illinois federal judge on Sept. 30 ruled on three motions for exclusion filed by a pipeline company opposing class certifications by homeowners who allege that they were impacted by a crude oil spill, excluding one expert witness, allowing another and limiting the testimony of a third.
ST. CROIX, Virgin Islands — An expert opining that a man suffered a heart attack after a flight attendant advised him to quickly walk to a connecting flight when his requested wheelchair was unavailable may testify, a Virgin Islands federal judge said Oct. 8, but granted summary judgment to the company that provided the wheelchair.
TULSA, Okla. — An expert who opines that an Oklahoma police officer’s operation of a pepper spray gun violated the department’s use of force policies and the manufacturer’s instructions may testify after the department’s sheriff failed to prove that the expert fell short of the requirements set under Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc., a federal judge ruled Oct. 8.
BENTON, Ill. — An Illinois federal judge on Sept. 30 found that an expert retained by an inmate accusing the prison and its employees of providing inadequate medical care meets the standards set under Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc., denying a motion to exclude.
TYLER, Texas — A man incarcerated for murder failed to show that he suffered actual harm when his sentencing judge limited the testimony of his expert witness, a Texas appellate court ruled Oct. 6 and affirmed his sentence.
SHERMAN, Texas — A Texas federal judge on Oct. 7 granted in part and denied in part a motion to exclude two doctors testifying that a man’s tinnitus was caused by a car accident, finding that one is unqualified under Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc.
BOWLING GREEN, Ky. — A federal judge in Kentucky on Sept. 30 largely admitted the opinions of eight asbestos experts on industrial hygiene, medical costs and causation, finding the latter opinions that cumulative exposure causes disease different than the rejected “each and every exposure” theory, and then denied a friction product defendant’s motion for summary judgment.
NEW YORK — A lower district court improperly excluded an expert witness retained by a couple who maintains that E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co. caused the husband to develop cancer because the judge relied on a state court evidence ruling when the federal evidence rule applied, the Second Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals said Oct. 6, reversing the summary judgment award and remanding the case for trial.
DENVER — The failure of a cell phone case manufacturer to confer with the company it sued for trademark infringement before moving to exclude expert witnesses is grounds for denial of that motion, a Colorado federal magistrate judge ruled Sept. 27, but in the interest of “meaningful negotiations” over the methodology, she denied the motion in part without prejudice and found that the expert meets the qualification standard under Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc.
BATON ROUGE, La. — A company sued for its role at a construction site accident failed to convince a Louisiana federal judge that the injured man’s expert witness did not meet the standards set under Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc., with the judge on Sept. 21 denying its motion to exclude.
LINCOLN, Neb. — An expert’s causation opinion involving asbestos and diesel fumes is directly contradicted by the industrial hygienist on which he allegedly relied, and his opinion generally lumping potential causes would not assist the jury, a federal judge in Nebraska said in excluding an expert and granting a former employer summary judgment Sept. 29.
BOSTON — Finding that the testimony of an improperly admitted expert “likely swayed the jury’s verdict,” the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court on Sept. 27 overturned a woman’s murder conviction and remanded the case for a new trial.
BATON ROUGE, La. — A Louisiana federal judge on Sept. 17 ordered a hearing to determine the admissibility of an expert’s opinion on injury causation in a case in which the parties dispute the injuries a man sustained in a collision with a truck, but the judge otherwise denied the man’s motion to exclude under Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc.
ANN ARBOR, Mich. — Defendants in one of the lawsuits stemming from the Flint water crisis on Sept. 15 filed a reply brief in Michigan federal court to exclude one of the bellwether plaintiffs’ experts on grounds that his opinions “have little relation to” the allegations of professional negligence that the plaintiffs are making against the defendant in question.
MARTINSBURG, W.Va. — An expert’s opinions on what caused a fatal accident are “bare conclusions without reliable support,” a West Virginia federal judge said Sept. 22, granting a motorcycle company’s motion to exclude the witness and awarding it summary judgment, finding that without his testimony, the decedent’s estate cannot establish a liability claim.
SAN FRANCISCO — In a motion filed in California federal court on Sept. 22, Monsanto Co. argues that two causation experts for glyphosate cancer plaintiffs should be excluded on grounds that they do not meet the requirements of Federal Rule of Evidence 702 and that they “stray far from any reliable methodology.”
SAN FRANCISCO — Even excluding a nonwitness expert’s talc testing results as hearsay, a second expert provided sufficient grounds on which to trace asbestos from talc mines to the finished product a man used for decades, a California appeals court said in applying de novo review and reversing summary judgment for two Johnson & Johnson entities on Sept. 21.
FORT MYERS, Fla. — An expert retained by a doctor arguing that his insurer erroneously rescinded his disability policy cannot testify, a Florida federal judge ruled Sept. 17, agreeing with the insurer that his testimony constitutes improper legal conclusions.