Gastroenterology Expert Allowed to Opine on Salmonella Infection

Plaintiff Krystal Martinez brought this case as next friend of her minor son, D.M., alleging that D.M. contracted salmonella by eating contaminated food served at a hotel operated by Defendant Omni Hotels Management Corporation.

Omni Hotels filed a motion to exclude certain testimony of Plaintiff's expert witness, Dr. Jason Reich.

Gastroenterology Expert Witness

Dr. Jason S. Reich is a board-certified gastroenterologist with several years of experience, with extensive training and expertise in the evaluation and management of gastrointestinal infections, including foodborne illnesses such as Salmonella gastroenteritis.

Want to know more about the challenges Jason Reich has faced? Get the full details with our Challenge Study report.

Discussion by the Court

Omni contended that "Reich may be a board-certified gastroenterologist" but only an epidemiologist can testify about the likely cause of D.M.'s illness. First, by not raising this argument in its motion, Omni has forfeited it. Second, its initial approach was wiser, as this is not a persuasive argument. An epidemiologist might be necessary to explain the contours of an epidemic, but this is a case about an individual's diagnosis. A gastroenterologist's training and experience (and Reich's specifically) is sufficient to give him a basis to opine on the likely causes of specific case of gastroenterological illness.

Omni noted that reliable methodology for determining causation that is "generally accepted in the medical community and by the courts" should include consideration of any possible recognized causes of an injury or illness and eliminating those contradicted by the evidence.

It is also true that causation in this context requires showing both general and specific causation. The Court does not agree, however, that Reich's methodology on either point is inadequate.

The general causation question here is whether eating poorly prepared food, as Plaintiff alleges, can cause salmonella in the abstract. Nobody seriously contends that it cannot. Further, Reich did, in fact, explain that non-typhoidal salmonella (the type D.M. contracted) "is one of the most common bacterial infections responsible for foodborne illness both in the United States and globally" and that it "is most commonly associated with the ingestion of undercooking meat, poultry, or eggs." His basis for this is sufficiently supported and meets the general causation requirement.

Omni's argument regarding general causation is that Reich "does not address the results of the [Broomfield County Health Department] salmonella investigation, nor does he offer an explanation as to why he reached a contrary conclusion." It also notes that there were eleven individual cases identified by the county, but Reich did not interview them. Reich's report, however, does discuss the County report, and while it does not specifically state why he disagreed with its conclusion, the rest of the report clearly explains his rationale. And he explains why his conclusion as to D.M.'s situation differs from the general conclusion of the county.

As to specific causation, the issue is whether Reich's methods are sufficient to allow him to opine that, in this specific instance, eating Omni's food likely caused D.M.'s illness. Omni first argued that this requires Reich to point to a "particular conduct or substance that caused D.M.'s salmonella infection." But that level of specificity is not necessary. Instead, specific causation only requires the expert to consider and eliminate other potential causes.

Here, Reich did so. He explained his reasoning that this form of salmonella is most likely contracted through undercooked food, that other causes were unlikely, and that there was evidence that Omni served undercooked food, including in particular hamburger meat, while D.M. was there. The fact that D.M. apparently only ate food provided by Omni during the likely period he contracted the illness makes this case somewhat unusual in that, if proven, it removes any other food-borne sources from consideration. This sort of process of elimination and differential diagnosis is a well-established method of determining specific causation.

Held

The Court denied the Defendant's motion to limit the testimony of Dr. Jason Reich.

Key Takeaway

First-hand knowledge is not requisite to the admissibility of an expert opinion. To the extent the County's report may be contrary to Reich's, it is fodder for cross-examination, but it does not render his opinions inadmissible.

Case Details: