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.
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
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.
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.
In this personal injury and products liability case, the plaintiff hired two engineering expert witnesses to help in her case. The judge allowed the testimony after a Daubert challenge.
The plaintiff, the widow of a woman who died after childbirth, sued the medical facilities for malpractice. He called four expert witnesses. Two were excluded and two were partially excluded.
Defendant was indicted for transferring a gun to a minor and for affecting interstate commerce. Defendant hired an expert witness in memory and perception. The court excluded this expert from testifying.