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

Biomedical engineering expert witness excluded in Minnesota for unreliable opinion

In the increasing array of negative reports about hip replacements gone wrong, the latest addition was a Minnesota District Court judgment (Thompson v. Zimmer Inc.) that excluded a biomedical engineering expert witness for offering unreliable opinion without any supporting facts or data. Background of the case Plaintiff Tina Thompson was implanted with an artificial hip designed, […]

read more

Engineering expert witness saves firm from $100 million negligence claim

Affirming Florida District Court’s decision on Tampa Bay Water v. HDR Engineering, Inc., the Eleventh Circuit recently admitted an engineering expert witness testimony which saved the firm more than $100 million in damages at trial. The judgment was a reconfirmation of the fact that nothing can come in the way of an expert with a scientific methodology backed […]

read more

Mechanical engineering expert witnesses reviewed in New York

The New York District Court recently ruled upon two mechanical engineering expert witnesses in a product liability action (Auther v. Oshkosh Corp.) – admitting one and precluding the other from testifying at trial. Particulars of the case Plaintiff Richard Auther, a United States Marine, sought to recover damages for personal injuries sustained while participating in United […]

read more

Wireless communications expert witnesses fight it out in MobileMedia vs. Apple – Part 2

* Continued from Part 1 After discussing the ‘075 Patent issue, we now look at the remaining two claims. U.S. Patent No. 6,070,068: “Communication Terminal Device and Method for Controlling a Connecting State of a Call into a Desired Connection State upon a Predetermined Operation by a User” Apple’s evidence (a) Validity claim Apple asserted that […]

read more

Wireless communications expert witnesses fight it out in MobileMedia vs. Apple – Part 1

The Delaware District Court has partially granted Apple Inc.’s motion for judgment as a matter of law with respect to invalidity of three infringement claims covering call-handling and camera technology patents held by MobileMedia Ideas LLC. Computer engineering and wireless communication expert witnesses were retained by both parties and offered impressive arguments for both sides. […]

read more

Nine expert witness challenges ruled upon in Wisconsin

The Wisconsin District Court recently came across nine lengthy motions in limine filed by the Defendants in the case of Stevens v. Stryker Corp. – all challenging the admissibility of the Plaintiff’s expert witnesses. The cause of action arose when a pain pump manufactured by Defendants Stryker Corporation and Stryker Sales Corporation caused Plaintiff Amy […]

read more

Defendant poses Daubert challenge to its own expert witness in Indiana

A typical Daubert challenge is a motion wherein the validity and admissibility of a particular expert testimony is challenged by the opposing counsel. Interestingly, the Indiana District Court was recently faced with an unusual Daubert motion in the case of Delarosa v. Speedway LLC, where the Defendant of the negligence suit sought to exclude not only the […]

read more