Internal Medicine Expert’s Testimony About a Reasonable Accommodation Excluded
Posted on September 11, 2025 by Expert Witness Profiler
Plaintiff Taplice Stapleton filed suit against her former employer, Prince
Carpentry, Inc., and individual Defendants Thomas Voss and John Punis. Plaintiff brought claims for unequal pay and disability discrimination. Defendant Prince Carpentry, Inc., is a drywall and carpentry subcontracting company owned by Defendant Thomas Voss. At the time of Plaintiff’s termination she was earning an annual salary of $62,000.
Defendants filed a motion to strike the expert report of Dr. Balvindar S. Sareen. Defendants argued that Sareen’s report consisted of legal conclusions that are impermissible under the Federal Rules of Evidence, and those portions of his report that did not contain legal conclusions otherwise constituted a narration of irrelevant facts.
Internal Medicine Expert Witness
Dr. Balvindar S. Sareen graduated from the University of Delhi, Maulana Azad Medical College, in 1977, and completed an internship and residency in Internal Medicine at North Shore University Hospital in 1989. Sareen is board certified in Internal Medicine and Geriatrics, is a Diplomate of the American Board of Quality Assurance and Utilization Review Physicians, and holds a Master of Business Administration.
He is licensed to practice medicine in the state of New York. He has actively practiced medicine clinically for over 30 years and has also served in various executive positions. Sareen is currently the Senior Medical Director/Vice President for Healthcare Partners in Garden City, New York, and continues to practice clinically.
Discussion by the Court
Sareen’s report concluded that Plaintiff was “within her rights” to insist on returning to work full-time, notwithstanding her doctor’s medical advice to work only 20 hours per week, and that her request to do so was reasonable.
This determination, as to whether the Plaintiff’s request to work more than 20 hours per week would be a reasonable accommodation, is a conclusion to be reached by the jury in determining Defendants’ liability on Plaintiff’s
failure to accommodate claims.
Sareen’s report also stated: “to conclude, the common decision to override physician’s instructions, and make one’s own health-related decision, was here one to be made entirely by Plaintiff.”
However, whether Defendants were reasonable in refusing to grant Plaintiff an accommodation that conflicted with medical guidance is also a determination to be made by the jury. Therefore, the Court agreed that Sareen’s report consisted of legal conclusions unfit for expert evidence, and these conclusions must be stricken from his report.
However, the Court found that Sareen’s testimony regarding the issue of patients failing to comply with their doctor’s orders, and how commonplace that occurrence is, may be admitted to provide helpful background information to the jury. Additionally, the factual narration provided by Sareen in the report is limited and did not impermissibly “invade the province of the jury by finding facts that are in contention in this case.”
Held
The Defendants’ motion in limine to strike the testimony of Balvindar Sareen is granted in part and denied in part.
Key Takeaway:
In sum, it is common for expert reports to contain some background information situating their expert opinion, and the Court declined to strike Sareen’s report in its entirety on that basis.
Case Details:
| Case Caption: | Stapleton V. Prince Carpentry, Inc. Et Al |
| Docket Number: | 2:22cv4044 |
| Court Name: | United States District Court, New York Eastern |
| Order Date: | September 08, 2025 |
