Expert Testimony

News & Analysis as of

The Importance of Expert Consultations in Personal Injury Cases

The legal process requires injured plaintiffs to prove their damages within a certain degree of certainty. This means that juries cannot simply pick a number they think is fair. It also means they cannot simply guess what...more

Asbestos Alert: Paulus v Crane Co.

Second District Court of Appeal, Division Three, Action # B246505 (Filed Feb. 21, 2014, modified Mar. 24, 2014) 2014 WL 1157284 ____Cal.App.4th____ - Sufficiency of Expert Testimony to Prove Causation; Bankruptcy Trust...more

Toxic Tort and Environmental Litigation: Court of Appeals Revisits and Clarifies Causation Requirements for Expert Opinions

Causation is the crux of any toxic tort litigation. The Court of Appeals’ recent decision in Cornell v. 360 West 51st Street Realty, LLC, No. 16 (N.Y. Mar. 27, 2014) underscores that principle and revisits the causation...more

Judge Sets Aside $3 Million Jury Verdict because Expert’s Testimony is Baseless

Recently, in Cross v. Spears, CL 12-436, a Martinsville Circuit Court judge set aside a 3 million dollar jury award and ordered a new trial based on a ruling that the plaintiff’s toxicologist’s opinion testimony was “totally...more

Infringement Expert Excluded Where Expert Did Nothing More Than Parrot Claim Language in Infringement Analysis

Plantronics, Inc. ("Plantronics") filed a patent infringement action against ALIPH, Inc. ("ALIPH"). After expert reports were submitted, ALIPH moved to exclude the expert report of Plantronics' infringement expert. At...more

Is North Carolina a Daubert State? Drum Roll Please...

Yes! North Carolina is now officially a Daubert state, according to a recent decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals. In State v. McGrady, COA13-330, 2014 WL 211962 (N.C. Ct. App. Jan. 21, 2014), the Court of Appeals...more

Test for expert admissibility rises signficantly in North Carolina

One of the primary functions of trial judges is to serve as gatekeepers for expert testimony. If an expert’s opinion passes the trial court’s test then a jury should hear the testimony. If not, it should be excluded to...more

En Banc Ninth Circuit Demands That Courts Serve As Gatekeepers For Expert Testimony — Will That Rule Be Extended to Class Actions?...

In the battle over class certification, expert testimony proffered by both plaintiffs and defendants is playing an increasingly important role. The Supreme Court has not yet decided whether the test for admissibility of...more

En Banc Ninth Circuit Adds Teeth To Daubert Gatekeeping Obligation

On January 15, the en banc US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued a decision in Barabin v. AstenJohnson, Inc. that significantly strengthened and expanded the gatekeeper role of both trial and appellate courts in...more

Certificate of Qualified Expert Not Always Required for Claim Against a Design Firm in Maryland

For over 15 years, Maryland law has required that a party asserting a claim against a design professional – such as an architect or an engineer – for negligence in the rendition of professional services must file a...more

Don't Rely On Your Expert's Speculation To Save You From Summary Judgment

Just because an expert says something is so doesn't mean that it is. That's the lesson of Judge Gale's ruling last week in Carter v. Clements Walker. He rejected the evidentiary value of an expert's report stating that...more

Expert Testimony Recommending Vapor Intrusion Study is Insufficient Evidence of Health Effects, Does Not Trigger Need for EIR

After the Berkeley City Council (“City”) approved a mixed-use commercial and residential project on the site of a former car dealership and service garage, a community group sued, claiming that pre-existing contamination on...more

Filing Damage Expert's Reports Under Seal: Some Bright Line Rules

There are two trends increasing the costs of patent litigation. The first is the increased use of Daubert motions to exclude the opinion of opposing damage experts as unqualified or unreliable. The practical result...more

Finding of No Inequitable Conduct Reversed on Appeal -- Ohio Willow Wood Co. v. Alps South LLC

Addressing statements and representations made to the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences (Board) in the context of reexaminations, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed a district court’s grant of...more

Taser Takes Down Expert in Patent Infringement Action Where Electrical Engineer Was Not Qualified to Offer Expert Opinions on...

Taser International, Inc. ("Taser') proceeded to trial on its patent infringement action against Karbon Arms, LLC ("Karbon Arms"). After expert reports and with the trial approaching, Taser filed a motion to exclude the...more

Threshold for Admissibility of Expert Opinion Affirmed by Pennsylvania Appellate Court

Pennsylvania’s intermediate appellate court recently affirmed an order granting summary judgment for Rohm and Haas (R&H) in a chemical exposure wrongful death action, finding the plaintiff’s expert’s opinion regarding...more

Kimberly-Clark v. First Quality: District Court Excludes Expert Testimony on Obviousness for Failure to Include the Opinion on...

Kimberly-Clark Worldwide, Inc. ("Kimberly-Clark) filed a patent infringement action against First Quality Baby Products, LLC ("First Quality") over a variety of patents relating to disposable absorbent products, such as...more

Appellate Court Notes - Week of December 20

SC18845 - Milliun v. New Milford Hospital - A medical malpractice case with some general principals of law: Patient went into respiratory failure in a CT hospital which allegedly resulted in a brain injury. Patient was...more

New Video Segments from MLMLegal.com – Cross-examination of Dr. William Keep by Travelmax Trial Counsel, Jeffrey Babener

New Video Featuring the Cross-examination of Dr. William Keep by Lead Travelmax Trial Counsel, Jeffrey Babener Although Dr. Keep was called by the State of Kentucky as an expert witness to support the State’s case on...more

Administrative Law Judge “Anti-intellectual?”

Clearly annoyed, the 7th Circuit Court attacked an ALJ’s ruling on expert evidence as “circular,” “unscientific” and “anti-intellectual.” At issue was a conflict between the prevailing medical view on the cause of elbow...more

District Court Excludes Royalty Calculation of Defense Expert Where Expert Used an Incorrect Date for the Hypothetical Negotiation

As Cassidian Communications, Inc.'s ("Cassidian") patent infringement case against Microdata GIS, Inc. ("Microdata") moved toward trial, Cassidian moved to exclude the testimony of defendants' expert. The motion to exclude...more

Pennsylvania Continues Trend of Stricter Review of Experts in Product Liability and Toxic Tort Cases

For years, plaintiffs in product liability and toxic tort cases have viewed Pennsylvania's state court system as a favorable forum. Over the past year and a half, however, the Pennsylvania appellate courts have issued...more

Australian Postal Corporation v Digital Post Australia [2013] FCAFC 153

On 6 December 2013, the Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia dismissed an appeal by Australian Postal Corporation (Australia Post) and upheld the primary judge's decision that "DIGITAL POST AUSTRALIA" is not...more

Federal Circuit to Review Virginia Court's Decision Excluding Expert Report and Testimony Due to Failure to Apportion Royalty Base...

At the behest of Facebook, Inc., a defendant in a patent infringement case, a Virginia court excluded the report and testimony of a damages expert because the expert failed to apportion the revenue to the features causing the...more

Pennsylvania Courts Clarify Expert Testimony Admissibility Standard

The admissibility standard to which expert opinions have been held in Pennsylvania has just been clarified. In a recent decision addressing the application of Frye v. United States, 293 F. 1013 (D.C.Cir.1923), the...more

117 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 5