Tag: methodology
-
Transportation Safety Expert’s Testimony on Compliance with Federal Safety Regulations Admitted
This case concerns a motor vehicle collision that occurred between Plaintiff Bryan Russell Arnett (“Plaintiff”) and Defendant Larry Tyrone Fairell, II (“Fairell”) on December 14, 2022. Fairell filed a motion to partially strike the testimony of Arnett’s retained transportation safety expert, David Hedgpeth. Transportation Safety Expert Witness David Hedgpeth is the principal owner of Hill…
-
Expert Testimony on Legitimate Marketing Practices Admitted
The Federal Trade Commission contended that Amazon tricked, coerced, and manipulated consumers into subscribing to Amazon Prime. According to the FTC, this was accomplished by failing to disclose the material terms of the subscription clearly and conspicuously and by failing to obtain the consumers’ informed consent before enrolling them. The FTC also alleged that Amazon…
-
Engineering Expert’s Testimony on Metal Roofing Degradation Admitted
This case is a breach of good faith and fair dealing and breach of contract due to Defendant CSAA General Insurance Company denying Plaintiff George Richardson’s roof damage claim that occurred on September 23, 2023. Defendant filed a Daubert motion to exclude the testimony of Plaintiff’s expert witness, Michael Pruitt. Engineering Expert Witness Michael Pruitt,…
-
Relying on Personal Intuition Is Not a Valid Methodology for an Entertainment Industry Expert
This copyright infringement action concerns two musical works: Plaintiff, Rene Lorente Garcia’s 1998 song Algo Diferente (“AD”), and the 2021 track Don’t Be Shy (“DBS”), performed by Tijs Michiel Verwest (“Tiësto”) and Carolina Giraldo-Navarro (“Karol G”). Plaintiff brought two claims: direct infringement against Karol G and Tiësto (“Count I”); and contributory and vicarious infringement against Atlantic Recording Corporation (“Atlantic”),…
-
Marketing Expert’s Use of the Market Approach Methodology Affirmed
Plaintiff FireBlok IP Holdings LLC (“FireBlok”) sued Defendants Hilti, Inc. (“Hilti”) and RectorSeal LLC (“RectorSeal”) (together, “Defendants”) and asserted two separate causes of action under the Lanham Act, False Advertising and False Association, based upon Defendants’ use of the UL Certification mark and FM Approval mark on Hilti’s Firestop Box Insert. The Firestop Insert is…
-
Fire Investigation Expert’s Testimony About a Missing Orifice Admitted
On January 21, 2021, a fire destroyed Jacqueline Flynn’s home located at 7618 Craig Court in Orlando, Florida. The Plaintiff purchased a Thermacell Patio Shield on the day of the fire. Since the Patio Shield was the only energized device in use on the balcony at the time of the fire, the Plaintiff filed her…
-
Fire Investigation Expert’s Opinion on Damage to the Residence Admitted
On January 21, 2021, a fire destroyed Jacqueline Flynn’s home located at 7618 Craig Court in Orlando, Florida. The Plaintiff purchased a Thermacell Patio Shield on the day of the fire. Since the Patio Shield was the only energized device in use on the balcony at the time of the fire, the Plaintiff filed her…
-
Court Limits Testimony of Non-Retained Expert in BNSF Workplace Injury Case
In November 2022, while working as a BNSF intermodal equipment operator, Taylor A. Campbell fell several feet from a railcar ledge while attempting to lock a stuck inter-box connector (IBC). No one witnessed the incident. Campbell blamed the fall on BNSF’s failure to ensure a safe working environment. Fred Reinke, a BNSF manager, had developed…
-
Accident Reconstruction Expert’s Testimony About the Lid Locking Mechanism Admitted
This is a product liability case involving a Breville BPR600XL pressure cooker (the “Pressure Cooker”). Plaintiff, Hannah Frazier, claimed that suffered permanent injuries to her abdomen when the Pressure Cooker exploded, spraying super-heated liquid and steam across her body. The Plaintiff retained Jeffrey D. Hyatt of Specialized Testing & Forensic Laboratory to inspect and test…
-
Economics Expert’s Testimony on Anti-Discounting Policies Admitted
Plaintiffs sued Amazon.com, Inc., claiming that the company violated the Sherman Act. They contended that Amazon denied customers the “benefits of lower prices and fees” that would arise in a competitive market; and they said Amazon did so by imposing on third-party sellers “Most Favored Nation” policies that cause customers to pay supra-competitive prices. Plaintiffs’ economics…
