--- title: "Insurance Expert Witness’ Testimony About the Industry Norms and Customs of the Insurance Adjustment Process Admitted" meta: "og:description": "Insurance expert witness testifies about the different relationships within the insurance industry and the standards for those relationships" "og:title": "Insurance Expert Witness’ Testimony About the Industry Norms and Customs of the Insurance Adjustment Process Admitted" author: "Expert Witness Profiler" description: "Insurance expert witness testifies about the different relationships within the insurance industry and the standards for those relationships" --- # Insurance Expert Witness’ Testimony About the Industry Norms and Customs of the Insurance Adjustment Process Admitted Posted on August 8, 2024 by Expert Witness Profiler This claim arises from 2B’s negligent handing of an auto insurance claim brought by Harold and Milagros Lacey against GoAuto insureds, Alisha and Kayranasia Hill resulting from a motor vehicle accident in Panama City Beach, FL on July 31, 2020 (the “Lacey Claim”). GoAuto is a Louisiana-based insurance company that writes policies in Louisiana, Texas, Ohio, and Nevada and whose senior claim adjusters are not licensed in the state of Florida. GoAuto therefore engaged 2B to handle the adjustment of this Florida-based claim. The parties, Plaintiff GoAuto and Defendant 2B Claims, each moved to exclude opposing expert witnesses. GoAuto filed a motion to exclude the expert testimony of [Kelly Gray](https://expertwitnessprofiler.com/expert-witness/Kelly-Gray/1560011) while 2B Claims filed a motion to strike expert witness [Susan Kaufman](https://expertwitnessprofiler.com/expert-witness/Susan-Kaufman/1544069) based on GoAuto’s untimely disclosure. ## **Insurance Expert Witnesses** [Kelly Kathleen Gray](https://expertwitnessprofiler.com/expert-witness/Kelly-Gray/1560011) is an attorney licensed to practice law in the State of Florida since 1993. During the past thirty years, she has focused her practice on insurance coverage and extra-contractual matters, both as a litigation attorney and as a corporate claims attorney. This includes first-party property litigation. In addition, she has several years of experience litigating various types of personal injury matters, including catastrophic automobile accidents, construction defect litigation, and professional liability. [Get the full story on challenges to Kelly Gray’s expert opinions and testimony with an in-depth Challenge Study.](https://app.expertwitnessprofiler.com/login?eId=1560011)  [Susan Kaufman](https://expertwitnessprofiler.com/expert-witness/Susan-Kaufman/1544069) has been retained as a claim handling expert or consultant in jurisdictions across the United States, including cases in Colorado, Florida, Kentucky, South Carolina, Utah, South Dakota, Indiana, Wyoming, Illinois, Nevada, Washington, and Arizona. She has given testimony as an expert in insurance claim practices on 80 or more occasions in state or federal court. She is presently a Florida Licensed All Lines Adjuster (620), and she has held such license since 1986. [Want to know more about the challenges Susan Kaufman has faced? Get the full details with our Challenge Study report.](https://app.expertwitnessprofiler.com/login?eId=1544069)  ## **Discussion by the Court** #### **Kelly Gray** GoAuto did not challenge Gray’s qualifications. Instead, it argued her testimony would not assist the jury for three reasons: it focused on irrelevant facts, did not articulate an objective industry standard, and constituted legal argument rather than expert opinion. As to relevance, GoAuto argued Gray’s differentiating between a third-party administrator (TPA) and independent adjuster (IA) is a “red herring” since “the crux of this case is not whether 2B’s relationship with GoAuto was that of an IA or that of a TPA, but whether 2B made negligent misrepresentations to GoAuto on proper Florida claims handling.” But regardless of “the crux” of the case, the Court held that the nature of the parties’ relationship (which is disputed) is relevant in determining what duties were owed. And to the extent GoAuto argued Gray was wrong about the relationship, that is a question for the jury. Next, GoAuto argued Gray did not articulate an objective, industry standard—that she provided only general statements of a professional standard without clearly defining [](https://advance.lexis.com/document?crid=6e5f5078-7f35-4327-b718-e77101c547d5&pddocfullpath=%2Fshared%2Fdocument%2Fcases%2Furn%3AcontentItem%3A6CNH-9993-RS1D-B38P-00000-00&pdsourcegroupingtype=&pdcontentcomponentid=6421&pdmfid=1000516&pdisurlapi=true) it. But, the Court found that Gray described industry norms and customs of the insurance adjustment process that are “beyond the understanding of the average layperson.” GoAuto claimed Gray did little more than summarize the record and make legal conclusions that usurped the jury’s role. Gray opines about the different relationships within the insurance industry, what the standards are for those relationships, and whether 2B Claims’ conduct was consistent with those standards, which, according to the Court, are admissible opinions. #### **Susan Kaufman** 2B Claims moved to strike expert witness Susan Kaufman based on GoAuto’s untimely disclosure. The expert disclosure deadline had been April 30, 2024. 2B Claims had served its expert disclosure by that deadline, but GoAuto had not. GoAuto disclosed Kaufman as a rebuttal expert witness on May 30. The parties disputed whether Kaufman was a true rebuttal witness and whether the disclosure had been timely. The Court held that the rule-breaking party has the burden to show its failure to disclose was harmless. Here, GoAuto has shown that the delay is harmless. As GoAuto argues, the disclosure came a month before the close of discovery and several months before trial, leaving ample time for discovery and trial preparation with the new information. Indeed, 2B Claims does not appear to contend that the disclosure’s _timing_ prejudices it, but rather that the testimony itself is harmful. ## **Held** The Court denied both motions to exclude the testimony of Kelly Gray and Susan Kaufman. ## **Key Takeaways:** - According to [Rule 704](https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rule_704), the fact that expert testimony may “embrace[] an ultimate issue” does not, in itself, make the testimony inadmissible. Gray opines about the different relationships within the insurance industry, what the standards are for those relationships, and whether 2B Claims’ conduct was consistent with those standards. - Gray described industry norms and customs of the insurance adjustment process that are “beyond the understanding of the average layperson.” - The expert disclosure deadline had been April 30, 2024. 2B Claims had served its expert disclosure by that deadline, but GoAuto had not. GoAuto disclosed Kaufman as a rebuttal expert witness on May 30. As GoAuto argues, the disclosure came a month before the close of discovery and several months before trial, leaving ample time for discovery and trial preparation with the new information. ## **Case Details:** --- ## **You Might Also Like** ![Corrections Expert's Standard of Care Testimony Admitted](https://ewp-blog.expertwitnessprofiler.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/blog-pic-640X480-2026-04-23T161938.085.jpg) [**Corrections Expert’s Standard of Care Testimony Admitted**](https://expertwitnessprofiler.com/insurance-expert-witness-testimony-about-the-industry-norms-and-customs-of-the-insurance-adjustment-process-admitted/corrections-experts-standard-of-care-testimony-admitted)![Human Resources Expert Allowed to Opine on Termination](https://ewp-blog.expertwitnessprofiler.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/blog-pic-640X480-2026-04-22T200052.311.jpg) [**Human Resources Expert Allowed to Opine on Termination**](https://expertwitnessprofiler.com/insurance-expert-witness-testimony-about-the-industry-norms-and-customs-of-the-insurance-adjustment-process-admitted/human-resources-expert-allowed-to-opine-on-termination)![Neuropsychology Expert Not Allowed to Opine on Cognitive Decline](https://ewp-blog.expertwitnessprofiler.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/blog-pic-640X480-2026-04-22T144728.528.jpg) [**Neuropsychology Expert Not Allowed to Opine on Cognitive Decline **](https://expertwitnessprofiler.com/insurance-expert-witness-testimony-about-the-industry-norms-and-customs-of-the-insurance-adjustment-process-admitted/neuropsychology-expert-not-allowed-to-opine-on-cognitive-decline)![Human Factors Expert Not Allowed to Opine on the Tile](https://ewp-blog.expertwitnessprofiler.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/blog-pic-640X480-2026-04-21T191749.960.jpg) [**Human Factors Expert Not Allowed to Opine on the Tile**](https://expertwitnessprofiler.com/insurance-expert-witness-testimony-about-the-industry-norms-and-customs-of-the-insurance-adjustment-process-admitted/human-factors-expert-not-allowed-to-opine-on-the-tile)![Insurance Expert Not Allowed to Opine on Legal Duties](https://ewp-blog.expertwitnessprofiler.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/blog-pic-640X480-2026-04-21T155751.487.jpg) [**Insurance Expert Not Allowed to Opine on Legal Duties**](https://expertwitnessprofiler.com/insurance-expert-witness-testimony-about-the-industry-norms-and-customs-of-the-insurance-adjustment-process-admitted/insurance-expert-not-allowed-to-opine-on-legal-duties)