Tag: Expert Testimony
-
Pharmacology Expert Allowed to Opine on the Clinical Trial
Alzamend Neuro, Inc is a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company focused on developing treatments for Alzheimer’s disease and other neurodegenerative diseases. To advance the development of a new treatment called ALZN002, Alzamend sought to conduct a phase I/IIA clinical trial to evaluate its safety, tolerability, and preliminary efficacy. Biorasi, LLC is a contract research organization or clinical…
-
Parking Expert Not Allowed to Opine on Duty to Warn
Plaintiffs Lisa Brun and Daniel Brun ( collectively, “Plaintiffs”) brought this action against Defendants PeakCM Lake Street Hotel, LLP, d/b/a/ Hampton Inn (“Hampton Inn”), the City of St. Albans (“St. Albans”), Integrated Technical Systems, Inc. (“ITS”), Cross Consulting Engineers, P.C. (“Cross”), and Conner Communications, Inc. (“Conner”) ( collectively, “Defendants”) arising out of the injuries Ms.…
-
Emergency Medicine Expert Not Allowed to Opine on Loss of Vision
Plaintiff, Amaris I Ward, who was seventeen years old during the events of this case, sought medical treatment at Madigan Army Medical Center (“MAMC”) over several weeks in October 2022. Plaintiff alleged that emergency care providers at MAMC failed to properly evaluate and diagnose her with acute bacterial rhinosinusitis on October 16, 2022, which led…
-
Compensation Expert Not Allowed to Opine on Company Reactions
In October 2015, Apple expanded its restricted stock units (“RSU”) offerings to cover all employees working for the company—including those classified as non-exempt or eligible for overtime. The Named Plaintiffs in this case all worked in jobs Apple classified as non-exempt or overtime eligible, which Apple pays on an hourly basis. Plaintiffs each received RSU awards…
-
Law And Legal Expert Not Allowed to Opine on Extinguishment of Debt
Plaintiff Charm Hospitality, LLC filed this lawsuit alleging, inter alia, legal malpractice against Defendant Nohayia Javed, Esq. Specifically, Charm made various allegations, in which it contended that Javed fell below the standard of care in her representation of Charm in connection with her prosecution of an insurance claim relating to water damage sustained at a…
-
Chemistry Expert Was Allowed to Opine on Phosphine-Air Mixtures
Crestbrook Insurance Company, as subrogee of Central Prairie Co-Op, sued Ecolab, Inc., for negligence and breach of contract. This case is about a fire that destroyed a grain storage bin and its contents. Central Prairie is a Kansas grain cooperative that stores wheat and other grains in large bins at facilities across the state. In…
-
Law And Legal Expert Not Allowed to Opine on Forfeiture
Plaintiff Charm Hospitality, LLC filed this lawsuit alleging, inter alia, legal malpractice against Defendant Nohayia Javed, Esq. Specifically, Charm made various allegations, in which it contended that Javed fell below the standard of care in her representation of Charm in connection with her prosecution of an insurance claim relating to water damage sustained at a…
-
Cardiology Expert Allowed to Opine on the Need for Additional Treatment
This medical-negligence/wrongful-death case resulting from the tragic death of Formeka Ball. Ms. Ball was admitted to the River Oaks Hospital Emergency Room complaining of chest pain and shortness of breath that started earlier that morning. After she died, Plaintiff Patricia Ball, Ms. Ball’s mother and the administratrix of her estate, sued River Oaks. Defendants challenged…
-
Employee Benefits Expert Allowed to Opine on Benchmarks
Sentara Health (“Sentara”) sponsored the Sentara Health 403(b) Plan (“Plan”) – a defined contribution retirement plan for its employees at its non-profit entities. Like virtually all such plans, it offered an array of investment options from which its employees can choose to invest a portion of their salary and company matching contributions. The Sentara Healthcare…
-
Law Enforcement Expert Not Allowed to Opine on Training And Supervision
Plaintiff Fernando Villanueva-Galvez claimed that Officer Eliseo Anaya’s use of a police canine to locate and arrest him constituted excessive force in violation of the Fourth Amendment. Villanueva-Galvez proposed to present Ernest Burwell‘s testimony regarding police canine practices. Defendants did not challenge Burwell’s qualifications. Nor did the Defendants seek to preclude Burwell from testifying entirely.…
