Tag: Expert Testimony
-
Law Enforcement Expert Witness’ Disclosure Held to be Inadequate
This case deals with the indictment of Derik Carothers. He is charged with three offenses. At Count One, the grand jury charged him with conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute a quantity of cocaine base, in the form commonly known as crack, a Schedule II controlled substance. At Count Two, the grand…
-
Environmental Engineering Expert Witness’ Testimony on Toxic Chemical Exposure Admitted
Over sixty Plaintiffs alleged that Defendant Lockheed Martin Corporation’s weapons manufacturing facility in Orlando released toxic chemicals that contaminated the air, soil, and groundwater, leading to various injuries among the Plaintiffs. The instant case formed a part of a group of related toxic tort cases. Following a complex history during the dispositive motion stage, the…
-
Telecommunications Expert Witness’ Opinions Regarding 3GPP Availability Admitted
Plaintiff Wireless Alliance, LLC (“Plaintiff” or “Wireless Alliance”) made certain allegations Defendants AT&T Mobility LLC, AT&T Services, Inc., and AT&T Corp. (“Defendants” or “AT&T”). According to Wireless Alliance, AT&T infringed the following United States patents that relate to improvements to cellular networking systems: United States Patent No. 9,144,106 (the “’106 patent”), 9,565,662 (the “’662 patent”)…
-
Construction Expert Witness’ Damages Analysis Admitted Despite Late Disclosure
This case stems from a 2022 subcontract between HBonilla (Plaintiff) and Defendant Ragle, Inc. (“Ragle”) for HBonilla to perform work for the City of Dallas. In 2023, Ragle claims it discovered that HBonilla had been overbilling for its work. After a dispute, HBonilla stopped working on the project and filed a lawsuit against Ragle and…
-
Maritime Expert Witness’ Testimony About the Historic Practices of the Navy Admitted
In October 2020, Sentilles (Plaintiff) was diagnosed with mesothelioma and subsequently filed a case asserting negligence and strict liability claims against multiple defendants, including Avondale (Defendant). He claimed that his asbestos exposure from the 1950s to the 1980s caused his illness. Sentilles stated that he was personally exposed to asbestos while working at Avondale’s shipyard…
-
Expert Witness’ Limited Testimony on Medical Billing Considered Unhelpful
On June 27, 2019, Plaintiff was involved in a motor vehicle accident with an underinsured driver. At the time of the accident, Plaintiff was covered by an Uninsured and/or Underinsured Motorist (“UM”) policy issued by Defendant. Plaintiff issued a demand to Defendant for settlement at policy limits. On August 26, 2020, Plaintiff filed a civil…
-
Insurance Expert Witness Barred From Opining On Electrical Equipment’s Sensitivity to Water Damage
On March 10, 2023, Subrigo International Corporation (“Subrigo”) initiated a lawsuit against Sentinel Insurance Company (“Sentinel”) in the Los Angeles Superior Court. Shortly thereafter, Sentinel transferred the case to the Federal Court. Subrigo’s claims arose from Sentinel’s refusal to cover property damage caused by flooding at its business location. Subrigo operated a data center in…
-
Intellectual Property Expert Witness Cannot Cloak her Testimony on Validity with her Experience
EPP and Paveloc both construct and sell “erosion prevention” systems that are used in retaining walls. The systems are made up of interlocking hiocks. EPP has a patent on its “Channel Lock II block” (US Patent No. 8,123,435) (“the 435 patent”). At some point the business relationship soured. Paveloc stopped making the EPP product and began…
-
Court Accepts Latent Fingerprint Expert Witness’ Analysis Despite the Subjective Nature of Comparing Prints
On August 14, 2022, a man dressed in black and wearing a camouflage baseball hat entered a Ross store on Coors Blvd. He approached the cash register with a box of tweezers but, instead of paying, allegedly pulled out a handgun and demanded money from two cash registers at the front of the store. After…
-
Data Analysis Expert Witness’ Testimony Admitted Despite his Failure to Incorporate Extraneous Factors in his Analysis
Defendants, M&J Management Company, LLC, d/b/a The Sexton Companies own and operate multiple multi-family housing units in Indianapolis and St. Joseph County, Indiana. Defendants have an occupancy standard of two occupants per bedroom that applies to all floor plans, regardless of the age of the occupants. Plaintiff, Fair Housing Center of Indiana alleged that Defendants’ occupancy…
