Plaintiff Guadalupe Garcia Al-Dahwa (“Al-Dahwa”) alleged that she suffered personal injuries as the result of a trip-and-fall accident in the parking lot of a movie theater owned by American Multi-Cinema, Inc. (“AMC”). Al-Dahwa averred that AMC had failed to warn her of the dangerous condition.
Al-Dahwa, who said she suffered from a physical disability, contended she tripped and fell in a ‘designated walkway because the concrete in the walking area was cracked, broken, and not level.
Plaintiff designated Jason English as a testifying expert witness. Jason English opined that the principal causative factor related to [Al-Dahwa’s] fall was the presence of an abrupt vertical rise and broken concrete disrepair in the accessible route providing access to the disabled parking area.
AMC insisted that English’s proffered opinions will not help the jury understand the evidence or determine a fact issue. Second, AMC argued that the probative value of English’s opinions are substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, and misleading the jury.
Safety Engineering Expert Witness
Jason English is a licensed Professional Engineer, holding a B.S. in Industrial Engineering with a specialty in Systems Safety Engineering and an M.S. in Safety Engineering from Texas A&M University. English has also completed post-graduate coursework in the Department of Architecture at Texas A&M, focusing on the evaluation and design of means of egress components. He is a member of the American Society of Safety Professionals, Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, National Safety Council, and International Code Council. Since 1999, English has worked as a professional engineering consultant, primarily consulting in the field of safety engineering, including workplace safety, premises safety, product safety, safety management, and human factors/ergonomics. He also serves on several safety standard development committees for the American Society of Testing and Materials International.
Get the full story on challenges to Jason English’s expert opinions and testimony with an in-depth Challenge Study.
Discussion by the Court
Reliability and Relevance Of English’s Opinions
In AMC’s view, this is a relatively simple and straightforward case: Al-Dahwa “contended that she tripped and fell over a clearly visible area of concrete that was cracked and unlevel.”
In response, Al-Dahwa argued that English’s testimony will assist the jury because his knowledge and experience on the issues relevant to the case are beyond that of the average juror.
The Court found the subjects that English intended to address at trial were directly relevant to the elements of Al-Dahwa’s premises liability claim. For example, English planned on testifying that pedestrians, like Al-Dahwa, frequently fail to see hazards in front of them as they walk. This opinion, which English based on published human factors literature, was relevant to both the second element (whether the uneven surface on the walkway posed an unreasonable risk of harm) and the fourth element (proximate causation).
English also intended to testify that the walkway where Al-Dahwa tripped and fell did not comply with the ADA, the TAS, and other applicable safety codes. This testimony was relevant to the third element of a premises liability claim—whether AMC failed to take reasonable case to reduce or eliminate the risk.
Similarly, English’s proposed testimony that AMC should have “establish[ed] and implement[ed] a proper safety program to identify, evaluate, and correct hazards with the reasonable potential to cause serious injury” also addressed the third element.
English’s Testimony Was Not Unfairly Prejudicial
AMC argued that English’s testimony should be excluded under Rule 403 because it “would unfairly prejudice [AMC], confuse the issues, mislead the jury, and improperly bolster [Al-Dahwa’s] liability position.” The Court held that AMC was simply trying to recast its arguments concerning the reliability and relevance of English’s opinion through the lens of Rule 403. The Court already flatly rejected those arguments.
Held
The Court granted the Defendant’s motion to exclude the testimony of Jason English.
Key Takeaways:
- Once the proponent of an expert meets the threshold requirements of expertise, reliability, relevance, and helpfulness, the Court should generally admit the evidence.
- English’s knowledge and experience related to the safety and accessibility codes applicable to where the incident occurred, safety engineering, when and how falls occur on premises are beyond that of the average juror.
Case Details:
| Case Caption: | Garcia Al-Dahwa V. American Multi-Cinema, Inc Et Al |
| Docket Number: | 4:23cv2010 |
| Court: | United States District Court, Texas Southern |
| Order Date: | July 11, 2024 |
Leave a Reply