Author: Expert Witness Profiler
-
Actuarial Science Expert Was Allowed to Opine on the Resulting Damage
This action arises from a dispute about the payment of service fees by Bulldog National Risk Retention Group (“Bulldog”) to Plaintiff GB Group. Specifically, the dispute centers on a Service Agreement between GB Group and Bulldog, as well as an Addendum thereto entered into in July 2018 and August 2020. To begin with, GB Group…
-
The Law Enforcement Expert Was Allowed to Opine on Pennsylvania State Police Policy
The Defendants are Pennsylvania State Police Troopers accused of using excessive force when they served a 302 warrant on Plaintiff Carl Giuli based on his wife’s reports that Giuli was experiencing a mental health crisis. While serving the warrant, an altercation occurred in Giuli’s house involving Giuli and Pennsylvania State Police Troopers Joseph Montagna and…
-
Valuation Expert Allowed to Opine on Economic Damages
In this insurance bad faith case, Plaintiff James Won alleged that State Farm unreasonably denied his claim for business property damage and lost profits resulting from a fire that occurred at Won’s Tapioca Express store in Edmonds, Washington on September 11, 2021. Won disclosed Michael Jack of Soundpoint as a financial expert but the Defendant…
-
Intellectual Property Expert’s Fair Use Opinion Admitted
The Volga German people are individuals of German origin who moved to the Volga region of Russia in the eighteenth century. Many of the descendants of the Volga German people have moved to other parts of the world after persecution of Germans in Russia. There is a sizable Volga German diasporain the American Midwest. Plaintiff…
-
Computer Science Expert’s Testimony on the Value of Data Admitted
This class action lawsuit arises out of Amazon’s practice of using smart-speaker technology (“Alexa”) to surreptitiously: (a) intercept; (b) eavesdrop; (c) record; (d) disclose; or (e) use millions of Americans’ voices and communications, all without their knowledge or consent. Such conduct blatantly violates Washington’s wiretapping law, which applies nationwide to Plaintiffs and all members of…
-
Pharmacoeconomics Expert’s Pricing Opinions Admitted
This is an antitrust action filed by Plaintiffs CareFirst of Maryland, Inc., Group Hospitalization and Medical Services Inc., and CareFirst Bluechoice Inc. (collectively, “CareFirst”) alleging that Defendants Johnson & Johnson and Janssen Biotech, Inc. (collectively, “J&J”) used monopoly power to unlawfully delay the introduction of biosimilar competitors for their drug ustekinumab (sold under the brand…
-
Transportation Expert Was Not Allowed to Opine on Hiring Practices
Plaintiff Casey A. Drake sued the Defendants Crete Carrier Corporation and Reuben Robert Shaffer for personal injuries arising from a vehicle collision. Drake was riding in a car driven by his niece, Erica Diehl. Shaffer was driving a tractor-trailer. As the two drivers passed a wrecked vehicle, they collided. Drake retained Robert Kelly and Jack…
-
Engineering Expert Was Not Allowed to Opine on the Condition of the Wooden Panel
This is a personal injury case. Plaintiff Amy Manzanares was allegedly injured by a wooden panel in Defendant El Monte Rents, Inc.’s recreational vehicle (“RV”) in November 2023. Defendant filed a motion to exclude Plaintiffs’ expert, Mark Goodson, P.E. Engineering Expert Witness Mark E. Goodson, P.E. is a consulting engineer licensed in electrical and mechanical…
-
Law Enforcement Expert Was Not Allowed to Opine on the Party’s Intent
Plaintiff Deborah Jones-MacDonald brought this civil rights action against Defendants, Harris County Sheriff’s Office (“HCSO”) Deputies Ronaldo Delgado and Charles Ribbe (collectively, “the Deputies”), alleging that she suffered personal injuries as a result of an August 13, 2021 encounter with the Deputies. Plaintiff sought to exclude the report of the Deputies’ expert, Michael A. Dirden,…
-
Railroad Expert’s Failure-to-Warn Testimony Admitted
This action arises from a train derailment in Lund, Utah on July 15, 2021, in which Plaintiffs Larry Keatley, Wirgil Rask, and Matthew Lindley (collectively, “Plaintiffs”), were operating the train as Defendant’s employees. Plaintiffs asserted a claim against Defendant under the Federal Employers’ Liability Act and alleged that the Plaintiffs’ injuries were due to the…
