Newsletter RSS

Mealey's Daubert

  • August 26, 2025

    Experts Featured In Mealey's Daubert Report

    Entries are in alphabetical order of the expert in each area of expert testimony.  Experts appeared in the January, February, March, April, May, June, July and August 2025 issues of Mealey’s Daubert Report.

  • August 26, 2025

    Miss. Federal Judge: Experts On Damages From Alleged Copyright Infringement Out

    JACKSON, Miss. — A Mississippi judge found that testimony from two experts retained by a local newspaper publisher is inadmissible under Federal Rule of Evidence 702 and Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc., granting separate motions filed by a digital news company accused of violating copyright laws.

  • August 25, 2025

    Machine Maker Secures Summary Judgment After Judge Says Experts Are Out

    CHICAGO — Summary judgment for the manufacturer of a drain cleaning machine is appropriate in a case brought by a man who claims that a defect in the machine caused his injuries, an Illinois federal judge held Aug. 22 after finding that the testimony from two experts retained by the injured man is unreliable and irrelevant.

  • August 22, 2025

    Maryland Firearms Examiner’s Testimony Is Admissible Under Abruquah, Court Says

    ANNAPOLIS, Md. — A Maryland trial court properly allowed a firearms examiner to testify for the state that a single unknown firearm could not be excluded as the source of the ballistics evidence recovered from two crime scenes, a Maryland appeals court held in finding that the testimony was proper under Abruquah v. State of Maryland, a state Supreme Court case that was decided days before the murder trial began.

  • August 22, 2025

    Panel: Ga. Trial Court Erred Allowing FELA Case To Proceed Without Expert Testimony

    ATLANTA — A Georgia trial court erred in refusing to grant summary judgment to Norfolk Southern Railway Co. because its employee, who claims that strenuous work on the railroad caused his injuries, lacked expert testimony to prove medical causation, the state appeals court held in reversing.

  • August 21, 2025

    Split 4th Circuit Reverses, Says Plaintiff Has Standing In EtO Injury Lawsuit

    RICHMOND, Va. — A split panel of the Fourth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals has reversed a lower court’s ruling that granted summary judgment on standing to Union Carbide Corp. and its affiliate in a lawsuit alleging exposure to ethylene oxide (EtO), ruling that the plaintiffs properly allege elements of West Virginia’s medical monitoring tort and therefore have Article III standing. The majority also said that “none of the reasons for which the district court excluded” the plaintiffs’ expert was proper.

  • August 20, 2025

    Motion To Exclude Amazon Expert Marketing Testimony Denied In FTC Suit Over Prime

    SEATTLE — A Washington federal judge on Aug. 19 denied a motion by the Federal Trade Commission seeking to exclude a marketing professor’s expert testimony regarding cancellation and enrollment flows in the Amazon Prime service in a suit accusing Amazon and its officers of tricking customers into enrolling in Prime, finding that the expert’s analysis is both relevant and  reliable.

  • August 20, 2025

    Expert On Injuries Out, But Judge Says Dashcam Video Not Enough For Summary Judgment

    LOUISVILLE, Ky. — A Kentucky federal judge denied a motion for summary judgment in a car accident case after finding that “genuine factual disputes exist regarding” whether a trucking company and its driver are responsible but ruled that an expert retained by a passenger cannot testify as to injuries because her opinions are speculative and unreliable.

  • August 15, 2025

    Panel: Plaintiffs’ Expert’s Opinion In Roundup Case Not Based On Sufficient Facts

    SAN FRANCISCO — A Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel has affirmed a lower court ruling that excluded a plaintiff couple’s expert in a cancer lawsuit against Monsanto Co. related to exposure to the herbicide Roundup, ruling that the district court correctly determined that the expert’s opinion was not based on sufficient facts or data as required by Federal Rule of Evidence 702(b).

  • August 14, 2025

    Expert Can Testify That Marijuana Use, Not Defective Helmet, Caused Brain Injuries

    SHERMAN, Texas — A neuropsychologist who opines that a man’s cognitive and neurological impairments were, at least in part, caused by his use of marijuana and not solely the result of wearing an allegedly defectively designed motorcycle helmet during an accident can testify after a Texas federal judge rejected the man’s efforts to bar her testimony under Federal Rules of Evidence 702 and 403.

  • August 14, 2025

    Texas Federal Judge Rejects Fees For Microsoft After Patent Judgment

    AUSTIN, Texas — A federal judge in Texas denied Microsoft Corp.’s motion for attorney fees in a patent infringement suit filed against it, despite a federal magistrate judge’s recommendation that Microsoft’s motion be partially granted; the judge disagreed with the magistrate judge’s assessment that the plaintiff company’s post-discovery conduct did not justify finding that the case was “exceptional.”

  • August 14, 2025

    Medical Providers Want Lawyers Disqualified For Expert’s AI Use

    SALT LAKE CITY — Two attorneys in a False Claims Act lawsuit should be disqualified for their role in submitting an expert whose artificial intelligence-generated report included a “litany of made-up quotes and sources,” medical providers say in Aug. 13 filings arguing that monetary sanctions are insufficient and that the court should stay the case.

  • August 13, 2025

    Amazon’s Human Factors Expert Out In FTC Suit Over Prime Membership Enrollment

    SEATTLE — A Washington federal judge agreed with the Federal Trade Commission that testimony from an expert retained by Amazon.com Inc. to opine on the company’s user interfaces in a suit accusing Amazon and its officers of tricking customers into enrolling in the Amazon Prime service is inadmissible under Federal Rule of Evidence 702.

  • August 13, 2025

    E-Cig Maker To High Court: Federal Circuit Gets Patent Damages Wrong

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — Electronic cigarette maker R.J. Reynolds Vapor Co. (RJR) tells the U.S. Supreme Court in a petition for a writ of certiorari that the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals’ affirmation of a jury’s award of more than $95 million in damages for infringing on another company’s tobacco pod technology conflicts with Supreme Court precedent on the apportionment of damages in patent infringement cases.

  • August 12, 2025

    Magistrate Judge Says Expert’s Opinions Based Solely On Experience Are Excluded

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — In a “decision [that] breaks no new ground,” a federal magistrate judge in the District of Columbia granted a motion to exclude an expert retained by a man who alleges that nearby construction damaged the two townhomes on his property.

  • August 12, 2025

    Judge Allows Experts In Case Alleging Mosquito Repellant Device Sparked Fire

    ORLANDO, Fla. — An expert retained by a homeowner who opines that a mosquito repellant device was defective and caused a fire can testify, a Florida federal judge said, rejecting arguments from the manufacturer and seller of the product that the expert’s testimony was inadmissible.

  • August 11, 2025

    Talc, Other Expert Opinions Largely Admitted In Dentist’s Asbestos Suit

    LOS ANGELES — A California judge said punitive damages will be bifurcated according to California law but otherwise admitted testimony in a former dentist’s asbestos personal injury case, saying that experts may call upon training and experience and that studies on which they rely need not be identical to real world situations.  In a trial brief, a dental supply company told the court that any potential exposure from its periodontal packs in the late 1960s and 1970s would have been too small to cause mesothelioma.

  • August 08, 2025

    Expert Withdrawn After AI Use Causes ‘Litany’ of Errors in False Claims Suit

    SALT LAKE CITY — A federal judge in Utah in an Aug. 7 docket-only order denied as moot a motion to exclude expert testimony after the plaintiff withdrew the expert report following disclosures that the expert’s use of artificial intelligence had led to fabricated quotations, citations and regulatory references.

  • August 08, 2025

    10th Circuit: Rule 702 Ruling Wrongly Excluded Evidence, Not Just Expert Witness

    DENVER — A district court incorrectly expanded a ruling on a motion to exclude under Federal Rule of Evidence 702 to bar a man who alleges that a former employer violated trade secret laws from presenting evidence and fact witnesses on lost wages damages at trial, the 10th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals held.

  • August 08, 2025

    Idaho Federal Judge Grants Motion To Exclude Expert In Patent Dispute

    BOISE, Idaho — A federal judge in Idaho ruled on the admissibility of expert testimony in a patent dispute, finding that certain testimony is now moot and that one expert is not qualified to testify.

  • August 07, 2025

    Judge Finds Proposed Expert Testimony Irrelevant After Certain Claims Dismissed

    TACOMA, Wash. — After granting a motion to dismiss a man’s negligent infliction of emotional distress (NIED) claim, a Washington federal judge found that testimony from experts retained by a man who sued after his wife died from surgical complications is admissible as irrelevant under Federal Rule of Evidence 702 and Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc.

  • August 05, 2025

    3rd Circuit Says Causation Expert Testimony Not Needed In Gun Design Defect Case

    PHILADELPHIA — With instructions to “not underestimate jurors,” the Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals agreed that a district court correctly excluded causation testimony from two firearm experts but found that the court erred in awarding summary judgment for a gun manufacturer because “[g]iven the other admissible evidence, a jury is well equipped to figure out what caused this gun to fire.”

  • August 01, 2025

    Mass. Federal Judge Says Expert Can Testify In Dispute Over Rental Car Coverage

    BOSTON — A Massachusetts federal judge has ruled that an expert retained by policyholders suing their insurers for prematurely terminating their rental car benefits can testify, finding that he is admissible under Federal Rule of Evidence 702 and that any potential bias goes to the weight or the credibility of his testimony (Diane Watts, et al. v. Liberty Mutual Personal Insurance Co., et al., No. 23-12845, D. Mass., 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 145918).

  • August 01, 2025

    AFFF Defendants: Plaintiffs’ Experts Are Inadmissible Under Rule Of Evidence

    CHARLESTON, S.C. — The defendants in the multidistrict litigation (MDL) for the firefighting agent aqueous film forming foam (AFFF) filed a reply brief in South Carolina federal court on July 31 arguing that the court should exclude the opinions of three of the plaintiffs’ experts in three cases in the MDL because they are inadmissible under Federal Rule of Evidence 702.

  • July 30, 2025

    College Tennis Player Class Certified In Suit Challenging NCAA Prize Money Rules

    WINSTON-SALEM, N.C. — A federal judge in North Carolina denied motions to exclude opinions from two experts and certified a class of college tennis players challenging the National Collegiate Athletic Association’s rules that limit the amount of prize money Division I players can accept when they win noncollegiate tennis tournaments.