On October 27, 2020, Plaintiff Robert Stephen Sentilles was diagnosed with mesothelioma. He filed a lawsuit against several Defendants, including Defendant Huntington Ingalls Incorporated (“Avondale”), claiming that his disease resulted from asbestos exposure that occurred from the 1950s to the 1980s.
With respect to Avondale, Sentilles asserted that he was personally exposed to asbestos when he worked at the shipyard in 1969 and that he was secondarily exposed from his brother Tom Sentilles’s clothing. At his deposition, Sentilles testified that he was exposed to asbestos when he worked in Avondale’s insulation shop from May 28, 1969, to June 24, 1969, sewing asbestos blankets that were installed on vessels under construction in Avondale shipyard.
Avondale retained industrial hygiene expert witness James Shea to counter Sentilles’ testimony. Shea produced two reports on March 8, 2022, and September 3, 2024. He was deposed on September 26, 2024.
However, Sentilles filed a motion to exclude some of Shea’s testimony and calculations from trial because they were not explicitly explained in his reports and would be confusing to the jury.
Industrial Hygiene Expert Witness
James Vick Shea Jr., CIH, CSP, specializes in industrial hygiene, occupational safety, environmental health, ergonomics, and occupational medicine administration for general industry. He is the founder of SheaSolutions, an occupational health and safety consulting firm. He received his Master of Science in industrial hygiene from the Central Missouri State University.
Discussion by the Court
Sentilles challenged Shea’s calculations of Sentilles’ dosage exposure to asbestos, that Shea handwrote the night before the deposition, contending these calculations should have been included in Shea’s original reports. Plaintiff argued that both the calculations and related testimony should be excluded because they include analysis related to take-home exposures that have been dismissed and are based on assumptions not supported by the facts, specifically that Sentilles washed his brother Tom’s clothes.
Analysis
The Court held that Shea’s calculations and his testimony regarding Sentilles’s total dose of asbestos attributable to Avondale comply with Rule 26 and will not be excluded. As Avondale points out, the basis for Shea’s calculations is included in his report and all he did for the deposition was write out the arithmetic. Thus, there is no undue surprise to Sentilles in this regard. Sentilles could have had his experts perform the same math with the information provided in Shea’s report.
Moreover, Sentilles can address Shea’s calculations at trial through vigorous cross-examination and the presentation of countervailing expert testimony. Further, Shea’s testimony regarding Sentilles’s take-home exposure is neither confusing nor inadmissible. Shea candidly admits that, for the purposes of his report, he made the assumption that, although the facts are otherwise, Sentilles’s laundered his brother Tom’s clothes because no epidemiological data exists for the scenario of simply being around a person wearing asbestos-containing work clothes. However, this discrepancy is easily explained to, and understood by, the jury and, again, can be addressed through vigorous cross-examination and the presentation of countervailing expert testimony.
Held
The Court denied Sentilles’ motion in limine to exclude Avondale’s industrial hygiene expert witness James Shea’s testimony.
Key Takeaway:
Shea’s calculations were clearly based on data provided in his reports. His testimony regarding Sentilles’ take-home exposure is neither confusing nor inadmissible.
However, Shea candidly admits that, for the purposes of his report, he made the assumption that, although the facts are otherwise, Sentilles’s laundered his brother Tom’s clothes but certain discrepancies are easily explained to, and understood by, the jury and, again, can be addressed through vigorous cross-examination and the presentation of countervailing expert testimony.
Case Details:
| Case caption: | Sentilles v. Huntington Ingalls Inc. |
| Docket Number: | 2:21cv958 |
| Court: | United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana |
| Dated: | October 31, 2024 |
Leave a Reply