Expert Witness Blog
Summary: Insurance Adjuster Expert Witness allowed to testify as the defense’s argument that the expert witness was not qualified to opine on damages was denied by the court.
Facts: This case (Endurance Capital, LLC v. Seneca Ins. Co. – United States District Court – Southern District of Indiana – October 31, 2023) involves a dispute over an insurance policy. The plaintiff was assigned rights and interests to an insurance policy which was issued by the defendant. One night, a slew of trespassers damaged the insured property. The plaintiff subsequently filed a claim, which was denied by the defendant. The plaintiff filed this declaratory action against the defendants arguing that they should pay for the losses under the policy. The plaintiff hired Insurance Adjuster Expert Witness Brian Haden to help prove their case. The defendant then filed a motion to exclude this witness from testifying.
Discussion: The defendant claims that Mr. Haden’s expert witness opinion should be excluded because he is not qualified to provide testimony in this case. The court opines that Mr. Haden is indeed qualified to provide an expert opinion on damages as he has a lot of experience as an insurance adjuster and has numerous certifications.
The court goes on to say that Mr. Haden has 22 years of experience as an insurance adjuster and has held numerous positions which required him to evaluate damages. In addition, the court notes that Mr. Haden has been recognized as an expert witness in numerous states, including Indiana.
Also, the court also states that Mr. Haden’s methodology that he used in his report is sufficiently reliable. The court notes that Mr. Haden inspected the property on four different days and reviewed relevant documents pertaining to the damage. The court thus opines that the defendant’s arguments about reliability go to the weight of the testimony and not the admissibility.
Last, the court state s that Mr. Haden’s expert witness report will assist the trier of fact in evaluating the damage that was done to the property.
Conclusion: The motion to exclude the expert witness testimony of Brian Haden is denied.