--- title: "Chemical Engineering Expert Allowed to Opine on Railcar Switching" meta: "og:description": "The chemical engineering expert is not unqualified just because he has not unloaded or switched a railcar himself" "og:title": "Chemical Engineering Expert Allowed to Opine on Railcar Switching" author: "Expert Witness Profiler" description: "The chemical engineering expert is not unqualified just because he has not unloaded or switched a railcar himself" --- # Chemical Engineering Expert Allowed to Opine on Railcar Switching Posted on April 8, 2026 by Expert Witness Profiler Ascend’s claims arise from Rescar’s misidentification and delivery of a railcar containing resin to Ascend’s phenol unloading area at Ascend’s manufacturing facility located near Pensacola, Florida. Ascend Performance Materials Operations LLC  designated [Aaron Imrie](https://expertwitnessprofiler.com/expert-witness/Aaron-Imrie/1533495) as a retained expert to opine on the misdelivery of the railcar and the impact of the mistake on Plaintiff’s equipment and plant operation. However, Defendant Rescar Companies filed a motion to strike Imrie from testifying. ## **Chemical Engineering Expert Witness** [Aaron Imrie](https://expertwitnessprofiler.com/expert-witness/Aaron-Imrie/1533495) is a chemical engineer with over 30 years of technical and commercial experience working or consulting for petroleum and chemical processing businesses. [Get the full story on challenges to Aaron Imrie’s expert opinions and testimony with an in-depth Challenge Study](https://expertwitnessprofiler.com/order/add?eId=1533495&pId=3). ## **Discussion by the Court** ### **A. Imrie is qualified to opine on railcar switching or unloading** Defendant argued that Imrie’s testimony on railcar switching and unloading must be limited because, although otherwise credentialed, his “oral deposition testimony confirms he is unqualified to opine on railcar switching or unloading.” Imrie has extensive experience designing and maintaining operating procedures and systems for chemical plants that utilize railcars to deliver raw materials, like the facility and system at issue in this case. Imrie’s knowledge and general experience working in this industry, specifically assisting with operating procedures and production flow at similar plants, qualifies him to testify as an expert, even though he has not unloaded or switched a railcar himself. ### **B. Imrie is qualified to give the limited opinions regarding YardMaster contained in his report** Defendant makes the same argument with respect to Imrie’s testimony regarding YardMaster, a computer program—that Imrie is unqualified because he has never personally used YardMaster. However, the Court rejected this argument for the same reasons identified above. Imrie’s discussion of YardMaster in his report is limited to (1) a belief that the Parties previously agreed to implement it at the railyard in question and (2) the intent behind the agreement to implement the electronic system was to improve on the existing handwritten method of tracking railcars. Imrie has not offered any opinions regarding how YardMaster functions within the computer program itself. Moreover, Imrie’s experience qualifies him to testify about the opinions regarding YardMaster that are identified in his report. ## **Held** The Court denied Defendant’s motion to strike the testimony of Aaron Imrie. ## **Key Takeaway** An expert’s qualifications do not need to be as granularly specific as Defendant proposes. [Rule 702](https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rule_702#:~:text=Rule%20702%20sets%20forth%20the,is%20a%20relatively%20narrow%20inquiry.) allows an expert to be qualified by means of knowledge, skill, experience, training or education. A lack of personal experience does not disqualify expert so long as there is another basis for his qualification. ## **Case Details:** --- ## **You Might Also Like** ![Chemical Engineering Expert Allowed to Opine on Railcar Switching](https://ewp-blog.expertwitnessprofiler.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/blog-pic-640X480-2026-04-08T195023.873.jpg) [**Chemical Engineering Expert Allowed to Opine on Railcar Switching**](https://expertwitnessprofiler.com/chemical-engineering-expert-allowed-to-opine-on-railcar-switching/chemical-engineering-expert-allowed-to-opine-on-railcar-switching)![Industrial Hygiene Expert Not Allowed to Opine on Falling Debris](https://ewp-blog.expertwitnessprofiler.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/blog-pic-640X480-2026-04-08T175126.051.jpg) [**Industrial Hygiene Expert Not Allowed to Opine on Falling Debris**](https://expertwitnessprofiler.com/chemical-engineering-expert-allowed-to-opine-on-railcar-switching/industrial-hygiene-expert-not-allowed-to-opine-on-falling-debris)![Architecture Expert Not Allowed to Opine on the Safety of Retail Escalators](https://ewp-blog.expertwitnessprofiler.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/blog-pic-640X480-2026-04-08T143944.585-1.jpg) [**Architecture Expert Not Allowed to Opine on the Safety of Retail Escalators**](https://expertwitnessprofiler.com/chemical-engineering-expert-allowed-to-opine-on-railcar-switching/architecture-expert-not-allowed-to-opine-on-the-safety-of-retail-escalators)![Insurance Expert Not Allowed to Opine on the Cause of Death](https://ewp-blog.expertwitnessprofiler.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/blog-pic-640X480-2026-04-07T201226.004.jpg) [**Insurance Expert Not Allowed to Opine on the Cause of Death**](https://expertwitnessprofiler.com/chemical-engineering-expert-allowed-to-opine-on-railcar-switching/insurance-expert-not-allowed-to-opine-on-the-cause-of-death)![Animal Behavior Expert Was Not Allowed to Opine on Drug Detection Dogs](https://ewp-blog.expertwitnessprofiler.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/blog-pic-640X480-2026-04-07T175803.497.jpg) [**Animal Behavior Expert Was Not Allowed to Opine on Drug Detection Dogs**](https://expertwitnessprofiler.com/chemical-engineering-expert-allowed-to-opine-on-railcar-switching/animal-behavior-expert-was-not-allowed-to-opine-on-drug-detection-dogs)