Court excludes unreliable pharmacology and neurology expert opinions in product liability case; grants summary judgment

In a lawsuit against Vitamin Shoppe, a man alleged its vitamin supplements containing arsenic and lead caused his peripheral neuropathy. He relied on his treating neurologist and a pharmacist to provide expert opinions on causation. The court excluded both experts, finding their methodologies failed to reliably account for the dosage of toxins consumed. Without admissible expert testimony on causation, the man could not withstand Vitamin Shoppe’s motion for summary judgment. The court granted judgment in Vitamin Shoppe’s favor on all claims.

Read More →

Court admitted the valuation expert reports presented by both parties in this case involving the termination of a wine distributorship agreement 

In a wine distribution lawsuit, the court denied motions by both parties to exclude expert witness testimony. The court found most issues went to the weight of the evidence rather than admissibility. Citing the less stringent Daubert standard in a bench trial, the court expressed confidence in its ability to properly weigh even questionable expert opinions based on the trial evidence. The court deferred key methodological challenges until trial.

Read More →

Court excludes the unsubstantiated testimony of labor standards expert witness on account of non-compliance with the disclosure requirements of Rule 26

The Court excluded the Plaintiffs’ expert witness report in this fair labor standards act case for noncompliance with Rule 26 requirements. The report lacked a detailed explanation of the expert’s methodology and opinions. It relied on facts not yet available through discovery. Further, it failed to identify supporting exhibits or provide the expert’s qualifications and publications. With no insight into the validity of the expert’s analysis, and given a prior chance to amend, the Court found exclusion necessary under Daubert. Compliance with disclosure rules is key.

Read More →

Eleventh Circuit clarifies the difference between the two types of expert witness disclosures under Rule 26

Eleventh Circuit elaborated on the difference between two types of expert witness requirements under Rule 26 in the instant case- a detailed written submission and a less extensive pretrail disclosure.
#experttestimony #federalruleofcivilprocedure26(a)(2)(B)

Read More →
  • Recent Expert Challenges

    Expert Challenges, Fire Investigation Expert Witness

    Expert Fire Investigator’s testimony determining the point of origin and cause of the fire found reliable

    September 29, 2023

    Accident Reconstruction Expert Witness, Expert Challenges

    Court limits expert testimony on crash reconstruction and its contributing factors

    September 28, 2023

  • Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.
    Your subscription has been successful.

    Stay on top of expert witness law and research updates!

    Subscribe to our newsletter and receive weekly updates right in your inbox!