Parental supervision not appropriate subject for expert testimony: West Virginia District Court

The National Safekids Campaign recommends that no child under the age of 12 can be left at home alone – but what if even at home, the parents fail to look after their child? At least seven expert witnesses on parental supervision were excluded by the West Virginia district court on January 15, 2014 in the […]

read more

Biomechanical engineering expert witness excluded for opining on matters beyond his expertise

An expert witness should always stick to his area of expertise while offering testimony, no matter how knowledgeable he thinks himself to be. The lesson was learnt the hard way for a biomechanical expert witness in Oaks v. Westfield Ins. Co., when the Louisiana district court decided to exclude his testimony for opining on matters […]

read more

Six expert witnesses challenged in trade secret misappropriation case

The United States has identified industrial spying as a significant and growing threat to the nation’s prosperity. In a recent judgment involving economic espionage, the California District Court ruled upon six expert witness testimonies, and confirmed yet again that “vigorous cross-examination, presentation of contrary evidence, and careful instruction on the burden of proof are the […]

read more

Civil engineering expert witness excluded in maritime negligence case

The Florida District Court recently excluded a civil engineering expert witness, saying “fundamental problems with [the expert’s] methods do not simply affect the weight or persuasiveness of his testimony but instead show that his basic theories, techniques, and conclusions are unreliable. Accordingly, [his] proposed testimony concerning the alleged dangerous condition of the Norwegian Sky’s pool deck must […]

read more

Engineering expert witnesses called to settle insurance dispute in Georgia

On Dec 18, 2013, the Georgia district court happened to rule upon two civil engineering expert witnesses in an insurance claim dispute (Cornerstone Missionary Baptist Church v. Southern Mutual Church Ins. Co.) While one of them was partially admitted, the other failed to clear the hurdle of appropriate qualifications. Particulars of the case This case […]

read more

Expert witnesses excluded in defective medical device case in Texas

Under Texas law, apart from being qualified by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education, an expert’s testimony must also be based on an adequate factual basis so that it does not amount to conjecture, speculation or incompetent evidence. In Schronk v. Laerdal Medical Corp., a litigation that involved an allegedly defective external defibrillator device, the […]

read more

Fifth Circuit affirms exclusion of environmental engineering expert witness

A few scattered errors in an expert report are not necessarily grounds for exclusion. Here, however, the universe of facts assumed by the expert differs frequently and substantially from the undisputed record evidence. Additionally, the expert made numerous assumptions with no apparent underlying rationale. Accordingly, the district court did not abuse its discretion in holding […]

read more

Construction expert partially excluded in Louisiana for failure to exclude causation alternatives

Relying on Fifth Circuit precedents, the Louisiana district court recently decided to partially exclude a construction expert witness in the case of LaShip, LLC v. Hayward Baker, Inc. for failing to exclude possible alternatives and zero down on the exact causation opinion. Background of the case The litigation arose out of work that Defendant Hayward […]

read more

Is a mechanical engineer really needed to opine on cause of accident?

The Virginia District Court recently accepted a mechanical engineering expert witness testimony in the case of Evans v. Home Depot U.S.A., Inc. to decide on an apparently simple issue of causation, saying his specialised knowledge and years of experience made him better equipped than a layman to assist the trier of fact. Facts of the case […]

read more

Four expert testimonies allowed in Goodyear Dunlop Tires’ product liability case

The Alabama District Court recently reviewed four expert witness testimonies from various disciplines in the case of Henderson v. Goodyear Dunlop Tires North America, Ltd. and scheduled a pretrial Daubert hearing to rule upon the latter’s motion for summary judgment. Details of the case Plaintiffs William M. Henderson (driver) and Pamela Stafford (passenger) were involved in […]

read more