Architecture Expert Was Not Allowed to Opine on Toilet Seats

Architecture Expert Was Not Allowed to Opine on Toilet Seats

Plaintiff Tony Joyner alleged that on January 19, 2024, he went to a Walmart store located at 8730 Liberty Road, Randallstown, Maryland. While Joyner “was in the process of utilizing the customer restroom facilities . . . the toilet seat disconnected from the toilet bowl, causing him to fall from the toilet, hit his head, and suffer personal injuries.”

Plaintiff designated licensed architect Sylvia B. Deyé as a liability expert to opine on whether the water closet where Plaintiff’s fall occurred was dangerous in a manner that caused Plaintiff’s fall, and whether Walmart created the dangerous condition.

Walmart filed a motion to exclude the testimony of Deyé on the grounds that her opinions were not based on scientific, technical, or specialized knowledge; lacked a sufficient factual basis; intruded upon the ultimate issue to be decided by the jury; and encompassed legal conclusions.

Architecture Expert Witness

Sylvia Beatrice Deyé has a master’s degree in architecture and is a registered architect in Maryland and other states. She is a member of several professional associations for architects and has over 30 years’ experience working as an architect.

In connection with her work as an architect, Deyé has selected plumbing fixtures, specified plumbing fixtures on drawings, and inspected plumbing fixtures after installation. Since 2018, Deyé has also served as an expert consultant in commercial and personal injury litigation. 

Get the full story on challenges to Sylvia Deyé’s expert opinions and testimony with an in-depth Challenge Study.

Discussion by the Court

Deyé’s report consisted of four findings. Deyé opined that: (1) “the unsecured toilet seat was unreasonably dangerous”; (2) “Walmart should have known through adequate inspections and cleaning procedures that the incident toilet seat was not secured to the toilet bowl”; (3) Walmart’s “failure to identify that the incident toilet seat was not secure created the unreasonably dangerous condition that was the cause of Joyner’s injury”; and (4) “Walmart’s failure to have replaced the incident toilet seat and identify that the seat was not stable failed to comply with nationally recognized and accepted industry standards for safe plumbing fixtures and created the unreasonably dangerous condition that was the cause of Joyner’s injury.”

Following a January 15, 2026 site visit to the Walmart store in question, Deyé supplemented her original report. In her supplemental report, Deyé discussed her inspection of the incident toilet, other toilets, and the conclusions of Walmart’s expert, and concluded that the opinions stated in her original report remain unchanged.

Analysis

Although Walmart argued that Deyé lacked expertise regarding commercial toilets, her deposition testimony reflected that she had experience inspecting toilets installed in both residential and commercial settings.

First, Deyé’s observations regarding the method of installing the toilet seat at issue and the fact that an unstable toilet seat can be dangerous are matters of common knowledge.

Second, the fact that Deyé’s proposed testimony was not based on scientific, technical, or specialized knowledge, rendered it unreliable and thus inadmissible. Deyé offered no more than her own ipse dixit to support her four proffered opinions, which is “the hallmark of an unreliable opinion.”

The Court held that Deyé’s opinions were not based on specialized or technical knowledge, which detrimentally affected both the relevance and reliability of her proposed testimony.

The opinions offered in Deyé’s supplemental report were also excluded. Because Deyé’s supplemental report sought to “add information that is missing from the original report” and does “not attempt to correct the original report because it is misleading,” it is untimely.

In her supplemental report, Deyé noted that during her site inspection—which occurred nearly two years after the incident in question—she observed that toilet seats in the men’s and women’s restrooms were not secured. The condition of the restrooms, one of which is not at issue in this case, nearly two years after the fact has no bearing on whether Walmart had actual or constructive notice of the defective condition at the time Joyner was injured.

Held

The Court granted Defendants’ motion to exclude the testimony of Sylvia B. Deyé.

Key Takeaway

Installing a toilet seat does not require specialized or technical knowledge. Accordingly, Deyé’s testimony on this issue was not helpful to the jury and warranted exclusion.

Case Details:

Case Caption:Joyner V. Walmart, Inc.
Docket Number:1:25cv1300
Court Name:United States District Court for the District of Maryland
Order Date:June 03, 2026

Comments

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *