Plaintiff sued defendant for failing to warn of possible effects from taking the drug Depakote. The plaintiff hired two expert witnesses to prove their case. These experts were excluded from testifying after a Daubert motion was filed by the defendant
Plaintiff argues that the defendant infringed on their patent for treatment of BPH by marketing their drug Cialis. The plaintiff hired a urology expert witness to assist with their case. The defendant filed a motion to exclude. The court granted a portion of the motion and denied a portion of the motion.
Plaintiff filed a declaratory judgment with the court related to a securities dispute. The defendant hire a securities expert to assist in their side of the case. The plaintiff filed a motion to exclude the expert’s testimony. The court denied the motion.
Plaintiffs sued defendants in an action involving an alleged defective car seat. Both parties hired expert witness and both parties filed motions to exclude. The court denied all of these motions.
In this medical malpractice case, the plaintiff appeals an opinion of the trial court excluding the opinion on oncology expert witness. The appeals court affirmed the lower court opinion.
In a recent Lawyers’ Weekly article “David Can Now Challenge Goliath”, the issue of taking on a party who has access to unlimited resources is addressed. JustKapital, a litigation funder that offers finance to plaintiffs on an international basis, argues that the lack of funding often deters plaintiffs from pursuing legitimate claims. “Disbursement Funding” can even the playing field by allowing plaintiffs to defer payment of third party costs until settlement. This can slow upfront payments, for funding of medico-legal reports, or the payment of Radiology Expert Witnesses.
It can often be that a firm is cash-strapped and not able to fund a report, which can result in the case being put on hold. JustKapital argues that disbursement funding allows a plaintiff to fire back against the defense, and maintain the momentum of the case. With disbursement funding, capital constraints can be lifted, and firms can take on more cases and generate more revenue.
In the article, a case was cited where a man was involved in a head on car crash. He was hospitalized for months, and had a lengthy period of treatment, recovery, and rehabilitation. During this time, the plaintiff obtained a suite of Expert Witnesses who created medical and radiology reports to strengthen the case. This lead to a successful monetary outcome, with the insurance company accepting liability and paying damages and other compensation. Without disbursement funding, the plaintiff would not have been able to pursue their claim as the cost of the radiology reports and other third party reports were sizable.
Plaintiff sued defendant after she was injured after falling off a personal watercraft. Plaintiff hired a labels & warnings expert witness to assist in her case and defendant filed a motion to exclude. The court granted the motion.
Putative class action plaintiffs filed suit against the vehicle manufacturer for defects in the sunroofs of certain cars. Both parties filed motions to exclude three expert opinions. The court denied the three motions.
In the case, the plaintiff seeks a declaratory judgment against defendant regarding language in a lease agreement. Both parties hired real estate valuation expert witnesses and both filed motions to exclude. The court denied these motions.
Plaintiff fell off a tree stand ladder manufactured by the defendant. Plaintiff sued and hired an expert witness to help prove his case. The defendant hired two experts as well. Both parties filed motions to exclude. The court denied these motions.