Author: Expert Witness Profiler
-
Orthopedic expert testimony on causation survives unreliable methodology challenge in Louisiana
The District Court denied Plaintiff’s motion to exclude the testimony of Defendant’s expert Dr. Millet. Though Dr. Millet did not examine the Plaintiff and made some factual assumptions, the Court found his methodology of reviewing medical records combined with his experience was sufficiently reliable under Daubert. The Court held disputes over the basis for an…
-
Unreliable testimony by metrology and food safety expert excluded in class action for false and deceptive advertising
In this class action, the court excluded expert testimony alleging Laird Superfood mislabeled serving sizes on its products. The court found the expert’s consumer-perspective testing methodology lacked scientific reliability controls and details. His opinions were also irrelevant to whether Laird followed FDA labeling rules. Without the expert testimony, the plaintiff could not prove Laird violated…
-
Vermont Court limits executive search and recruitment expert’s opinions regarding Plaintiff’s job qualifications and associated compensation range
Although Ketchum is qualified as an expert based on his extensive professional experience in executive recruiting, portions of his opinions were excluded as unreliable under Rule 702. His opinion on Wolfe’s probable compensation range relied solely on limited data points regarding Wolfe’s prior salary and his successor’s pay without explaining his reasoning. Ketchum’s opinion that…
-
Court admits expert testimony regarding restrictive covenants in public nuisance case
In Stone v. Harley Marine, the court denied Harley’s attempt to exclude Plaintiff’s expert, finding his long experience preparing neighborhood analyses qualified him to opine on land use and deed restrictions. The court held that the expert employed a reliable methodology involving site inspection and document review. While Harley could make specific objections at trial,…
-
Court limits fire and battery expert testimony in fatal laptop battery explosion case
This case arose from a December 2015 apartment fire in Everett, Washington that was allegedly caused by a lithium-ion laptop battery manufactured by Hewlett-Packard (HP). The plaintiff insurance company brought subrogation claims against HP for negligence and strict product liability under Washington law. The plaintiff retained two expert witnesses who opined that the fire was…
-
FTX Founder’s Experts Face Exclusion in Cryptocurrency Fraud Case
The upcoming fraud trial of FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried recently faced a major development regarding expert witnesses. Federal prosecutors filed motions to completely exclude all seven expert witnesses noticed by Bankman-Fried’s defense team. The Government argues the testimony of experts including a barrister, professors, and industry professionals would be irrelevant, unreliable, confusing, or prejudicial. Specifically,…
-
California Court admits the testimony of film and television industry experts in copyright infringement action
Plaintiffs allege certain episodes of Defendants’ shows Prank Encounters and Double Cross infringe episodes of Plaintiffs’ show Scare Tactics. The court denies Defendants’ motion for summary judgment, finding genuine disputes remain regarding substantial similarity and damages. The court also largely denies motions to exclude expert testimony on similarity and damages, ruling that flawed assumptions and…
-
Court admits royalty analysis on a convoyed sales approach, denied motion to exclude in Patent Infringement case
In this patent infringement lawsuit, the Court addressed Defendant’s motion to exclude Plaintiff’s damages expert under Daubert and Rule 702. The Defendant argued the expert improperly inflated the value of the patented inventions by including non-infringing products and features in his royalty calculations. However, the Court upheld the expert’s methodology. It found the expert permissibly…
-
Colorado Court weighs reliable basis of Pathology Expert’s testimony over semantics in medical negligence suit
The Court rejected the Plaintiff’s argument to exclude the Defense expert’s opinion that high mitotic rates correlate with poor prognosis. While the Plaintiff insisted this equated to an unreliable, unsupported “prediction” of causation, the court found the dispute merely semantic. The expert never explicitly opined mitotic rates “predict” malignancy. Rather, he suggested an “association” or…
-
Eleventh Circuit clarifies the difference between the two types of expert witness disclosures under Rule 26
Eleventh Circuit elaborated on the difference between two types of expert witness requirements under Rule 26 in the instant case- a detailed written submission and a less extensive pretrail disclosure. #experttestimony #federalruleofcivilprocedure26(a)(2)(B) #federalruleofcivilprocedure26(a)(2)(C)
