Transportation Expert Allowed to Opine on Contracts and Policies

This diversity action arises from a motor vehicle accident that occurred on June 4, 2023, and resulted in the death of Noah M. Leyman—the Plaintiff's husband—and in injuries to Plaintiff Jurnee Leyman.

Defendant Firdavs Kubaev, acting as a driver for and in the course and scope of his employment with Defendant Timur Trucking, LLC, was hauling a trailer owned by Amazon at the time of the accident.

Amazon sought to exclude Plaintiffs' expert David French on the grounds that: (1) his report contains only ipse dixit assertions; and (2) his assertions are not reliable because there are no identified principles or methods of arriving at his conclusions.

Transportation Expert Witness

David French is a Certified Transportation Broker and Logistics Consultant. He has over forty-five years of training and experience in the commercial trucking industry.

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

Discussion by the Court

Plaintiffs produced an expert report authored by French regarding, amongst other things, the operational and contractor control Amazon Relay exerts over its motor carriers and drivers.

A. Ipse Dixit Argument

Amazon argued that "French's report does little more than quote various contractual provisions."

However, the Court has reviewed French's expert report and does not agree that French's opinion is simply ipse dixit. His report reflects that his opinion is based on an analysis of the Amazon Relay contracts, policies, and terms of service, as compared to federal safety regulations and commercial practices. French's extensive experience in the commercial trucking industry allows him to draw conclusions from the factual data in this case. This does not make the opinions mere ipse dixit.

B. Reliability Argument

Amazon relatedly argued that French's report is unreliable because it "does not contain any principles or methods for arriving at his conclusions aside from conclusory assertions."

French applied years of experience when examining Amazon Relay's "contracts, policies, and Terms of Service" in order to opine on whether they were typical of normal business relationships and practices in this industry. French's report is not scientific or technical in nature; therefore, his methodology "need not be the rigorous or technical review as might be necessary for purely scientific or technical testimony." Rather, it is enough that French's report ties his observations about the relevant documents to conclusions through "the use of general truths derived from specialized experience."

Held

The Court denied Amazon's motion to exclude the testimony Plaintiff's expert David French.

Key Takeaway

It is well settled that an expert may testify based on personal experience. Moreover, an expert's report need not catalog all the details of the experiential knowledge on which the expert relies.

Case Details: