Summary: Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation Expert Witness testimony excluded despite defendant’s argument that he was not qualified to offer testimony
Facts: This case (Bermudez v. City of New York – United States District Court – Eastern District of New York – December 21st, 2018) involves the alleged excessive use of force related to the arrest of the plaintiff. The plaintiff has hired Dr. Ali Guy, M.D. (Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation Expert Witness) to provide testimony. The defendant has filed a motion to exclude the expert witness testimony of Dr. Guy.
Discussion: The defendant argue that Dr. Guy’s testimony should be excluded because he does not have the relevant knowledge and experience to provide testimony on the nature and cause of the plaintiff’s alleged injuries, his opinion is conclusory and thus not reliable, and that his testimony will not assist the trier of fact.
The defendants argue that Dr. Guy is not qualified to testify regarding the plaintiff’s alleged injuries because he is a physiatrist, not an orthopedist or neurologist. The court opines that it agrees with the defendants that Dr. Guy’s education, training, and experience do not qualify him to render an opinion on the plaintiff’s alleged injuries. Dr. Guy’s report links many injuries to the alleged use of force by the defendants. The court opines that the plaintiff has not explained why Dr. Guy’s qualifications as a physiatrist permits him to opine on certain alleged injuries, including hearing loss and tinnitus, vertigo, post-traumatic stress syndrome, anxiety, and depression. The court also opines that the plaintiff does not explain what various injuries and accidents Dr. Guy has previously treated that would qualify him to render an opinion on all of the plaintiff’s many and varied injuries alleged in this case.
The court also opines that Dr. Guy’s opinion is unreliable. The court opines that the materials that Dr. Guy reviewed in preparing his initial report does not explain how he reached his conclusions. The court opines that Dr. Guy’s opinion is conclusory, in that it skips from the plaintiff’s recent medical history to Dr. guy’s positive causation opinion. the court opines that Dr. Guy does not explain the basis of his conclusions. In addition, the court also states that Dr. Guy does not explain why he ruled out other causes for the plaintiff’s depression and anxiety.
In addition, the court opines that it does not need to reach the defendant’s argument that Dr. Guy’s testimony would not assist the jury as the court has concluded that Dr. Guy may not offer an expert opinion in this case.
Conclusion: The motion to exclude the expert witness testimony of Dr. Ali Guy, M.D. is granted.