The defendant challenged the standard of care expert witness testimony of anesthesiologist on numerous grounds. The court denied the motion.
In this title insurance dispute involving the construction of a ski resort in Idaho, the plaintiffs challenged the expert witness testimony of two experts. The court granted one motion to exclude in part and denied the other in full.
- Valdes v. Miami-Dade County et al – United States District Court – District of Southern Florida – November 6th, 2015 – This case involves an alleged violation of civil rights. The plaintiff sought to exclude the expert witness testimony of Dr. Jason Buchwald, a forensic & laboratory testing expert witness, based on speculative and conclusory opinions as well as lack of qualification. The motion to strike the expert witness testimony was denied by the court.
- Bailey v. Stanley Access Techs., Inc – United States District Court – District Court of Northern Mississippi – November 6th, 2015 – In this personal injury case involving an automatic sliding door in a hotel, numerous experts were called to produce testimony. The defendants filed a motion to exclude the testimony of Warren Davis, Phd as a physics expert witness. The plaintiff has filed a motion to exclude the testimony of David Sitter, an electrical engineering expert witness. In addition, one defendant (Stanley) objects to four parts of Michael Panish, the other defendant’s doors expert witness. All three expert witness testimonies were granted in part and denied in part.
- Michael F. Abrams, et al., Plaintiffs, -vs- Nucor Steel Marion, Inc. – United States District Court – Northern District of Ohio – November 9th, 2015 – This property damage/trespass case involves the release of manganese from a steel plant. The plaintiffs have hired Dr. Jonathan Rutchik (a neurology expert witness), Lance Traves (an environmental expert witness), Craig Cantrall (a real estate agent expert witness). The defendant filed motions to exclude the testimony of each witness.
Both plaintiffs and defendants hired expert witnesses in this proposed class action. In one piece of the case, the defendants filed a motion to exclude the testimony of an expert in marketing. The court denied the motion.
Numerous defendants were indicted on various charges, including racketeering conspiracy. The Government alleges that the defendants were associated with a street gang and hired to experts to help prove their case.
- Sargent v. Commonwealth – United States District Court – Middle District of Pennsylvania – October 26th, 2015 – This case involves an alleged use of excessive force by an arresting policeman. The plaintiff hired R. Paul McCauley, a deadly/excessive force expert witnesses. The defendant challenged Dr. McCauley should not be allowed to testify on the following: 1) whether the force used was excessive or unreasonable and 2) whether defendant could have done under the circumstances. The judge granted the motion in part and denied it in part, stating that Dr. McCauley’s testimony is limited to the extent that it references the reasonableness or excessiveness of the force used.
- The People v. Jason James Zamora – Court of Appeal, Fourth Appellate District – State of California – October 29th, 2015 – In this case involving a fight at a bar, the defendant hired Dr. Thomas Streed as a deadly/excessive force expert witness. The lower court excluded this testimony (stating that the expert was not qualified) and the defendant appealed. The court affirmed the opinion of the lower court.
- In re: The Marriage of Rebecca Lynn Sternat – Wisconsin Court of Appeals – October 28, 2015 – In this divorce case, the lower allowed the plaintiff’s expert witness testimony of Kris Disbrow, a business valuation expert witnesses. The defendant appealed, stating that he is not qualified and his testimony is unreliable. The court affirmed the opinion of the lower court.
- United States v. 2.28 Acres – United States District Court – District of Nebraska – October 27th, 2015 – This is a land condemnation case. The defendants hired Wayne Kubert, a real estate valuation expert witness, to appraise the land in dispute. The United States filed a motion to exclude the testimony of Mr. Kubert based on his methodology. The court denied the motion to exclude, stating that the opposition goes to weight of the evidence, not it’s admissibility.
Plaintiffs filed suit against bank arguing that the bank illegally foreclosed on their home. Defendants challenged their expert witness on mortgage servicing and the court granted the motion.
After a residence fire, the insurer filed suit against the manufacturer of a space heater. The defendant filed a motion to exclude the testimony of plaintiff’s explosions expert. The court denied the motion.
Here are some recent challenges to expert witness testimony in federal and state courts:
- Danielides v. Northrop Grumman Corporation (Illinois Northern District Court – October 8th, 2015) – Expert Ronald Flom, a retired U.S. Army Colonel, was excluded from testifying as a government procurement expert.
- Mcdaniel v. Kidde Residential & Commercial (Pennsylvania District Court – October 8th, 2015) – Expert David J. Bizzak, Ph.D., P.E., a professional engineer expert witness who specializes in product failures, was allowed to testify in products liability case involving a fire extinguisher.
- Holmes et al v. Godinez et al (Illinois Northern District Court – October 8th, 2015) – Expert Elizabeth Stanoshek, a prison expert witness, was allowed to testify on ADA compliance policies in prisons in case involving ADA rights in a prison system.
- Prism Technologies v. T-Mobile USA, Inc. (Nebraska District Court – October 8th, 2015) – W. Christopher Bakewell, a business valuation expert witness, was partially allowed to testify in this patent infringement case.
- Gels Co. Inc. v. Hesselgrave (Kentucky Court of Appeals – October 9th, 2015) – Lee Martin, an architecture expert witness, was allowed to testify in this dance floor negligence case.
- Good et al v. American Water Works Company, Inc. et al – (West Virginia Southern District Court – October 8th, 2015) – Two expert testimonies were allowed and two were denied in this water supply negligence case: Lawrence M. Stanton (chemicals expert witness – Allowed), Seward G. Gilbert (expert in engineering – Not Allowed), Harvey Rosen, Ph.D (economics expert – Not Allowed), David Scott Simonton, Ph.D. (Environmental expert – Allowed).