Newsletter RSS

Mealey's Daubert

  • July 28, 2025

    ‘Sensitive Skin’ Mislabeling Class Action Was Properly Certified, 9th Circuit Says

    SAN FRANCISCO — The Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on July 25 affirmed a court’s certification of a class action against Johnson & Johnson Consumer Inc. (J&J) for allegedly misrepresenting the benefits of a sensitive skin care product in violation of California’s unfair competition law (UCL) and other laws, finding that the lower court properly certified the class based on the plaintiff’s damages expert and the likelihood of making classwide liability findings.

  • July 22, 2025

    Suit Over Allegedly Outdated Pension Assumptions Mostly Survives Summary Judgment

    SAN FRANCISCO — A putative class action challenging the use of allegedly outdated assumptions to calculate annuities for married pension plan participants is proceeding toward a bench trial after a California federal judge mostly denied the defendants’ motion for summary judgment and denied their motion to exclude the plaintiffs’ expert.

  • July 18, 2025

    6th Circuit Affirms Hip Implant Device Manufacturer’s Summary Judgment Award

    CINCINNATI — A lower court properly granted a manufacturer of a hip implant device summary judgment after finding that a man’s expert witnesses to support his claim that the device was defective were properly excluded under Federal Rule of Evidence 702 and Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc., the Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals held.

  • July 18, 2025

    D.C. Appeals Court: Expert Testimony Was Not Needed For Slip-And-Fall Case

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — A District of Columbia appeals court on July 17 held that “a lay juror could determine, from their common knowledge and everyday experience, whether” a janitorial company “exercised reasonable care in warning passersby of the hazard caused by the wet floor,” reversing a decision by a lower court that failure to present expert testimony was fatal to a woman’s case.

  • July 17, 2025

    Expert Who Testified On Intimate Partner Violence In Assault Case Properly Admitted

    CONCORD, N.H. — A New Hampshire trial court did not abuse its discretion in allowing an expert to testify about intimate partner violence in a criminal case, the state Supreme Court said, finding that the testimony met the state’s admissibility standards.

  • July 17, 2025

    Judge: Police Procedure Expert Can Testify For Comedian Alleging Wrongful Arrest

    MIAMI — A federal judge in Florida denied a police officer’s motion to exclude a police practices expert from testifying for a comedian who alleges that he was wrongfully arrested based assurances from the comedian that the expert will opine on whether the officer violated professional standards and will not offer legal conclusions.

  • July 16, 2025

    5th Circuit: Causation Experts In Deepwater Horizon Case Properly Excluded

    NEW ORLEANS — A Mississippi federal court did not err in awarding summary judgment to BP Exploration & Production and its affiliate after finding that a man’s experts retained to opine on how his injuries were connected to exposure to chemicals during remediation activities following the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill were inadmissible, the Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals held.

  • July 16, 2025

    Judge Issues Sweeping Order On Expert Witnesses In Lead Smelter Litigation Saga

    ST. LOUIS — A federal judge in Missouri has issued an order on multiple motions to exclude filed by both the plaintiffs and the defendants, ruling that portions of expert testimony are excluded in a long-running lawsuit brought by Catholic clergywomen and Peruvian children who allege they have been injured by a lead smelter operated by an American company in Peru.

  • July 15, 2025

    Delaware Supreme Court Says Expert Testimony Improperly Admitted In Zantac Case

    WILMINGTON, Del. — A lower court “erred in adopting a standard that favored or presumed the admissibility of expert testimony,” the Delaware Supreme Court ruled in an interlocutory appeal, finding that the trial court was wrong to deny a series of motions to exclude testimony from experts who opined that Zantac containing ranitidine can cause 10 types of cancer.

  • July 15, 2025

    Judge Limits Some Experts In Case Alleging Defective Gas Container Caused Fire

    PENSACOLA, Fla. — A federal judge in Florida agreed to limit testimony from certain experts retained by a woman who alleges that a faulty gas container caused a gas vapor to ignite, causing serious burn injuries.

  • July 15, 2025

    Dental Expert Can Testify For Government On Dentist’s Prescribing Practices

    TULSA, Okla. — An Oklahoma federal judge rejected arguments from a dentist accused of violating the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) that testimony from an expert retained by the government is inadmissible under Federal Rule of Evidence 702.

  • July 11, 2025

    1 Expert In, Another Excluded In Case Filed By Former Inmate Over Medical Care

    CHICAGO — An Illinois judge ruled on a pair of motions to exclude expert testimony in a case filed by a former inmate who alleges that the deliberate indifference by the staff at a correctional center caused him to suffer permanent liver damage.

  • July 11, 2025

    Expert Cannot Opine That Man Suffered From Sexsomnia During Alleged Rape

    WILMINGTON, Del. — A sleep medicine expert cannot testify that a man accused of rape suffers from sexsomnia, a form of parasomnia, and had no conscious awareness or control of the alleged conduct, a Delaware judge ruled, noting that the ruling was an issue of first impression in the state.

  • July 10, 2025

    Ky. Federal Judge Denies Series Of Motions To Exclude Experts In Pelvic Mesh Case

    LEXINGTON, Ky. — The Kentucky federal judge presiding over a long-running case against a pelvic mesh manufacturer denied three separate motions to exclude experts filed by the manufacturer and a woman who says she was injured by the mesh.

  • July 10, 2025

    Wash. Federal Judge Rules Experts Can Testify For Worker In FELA Injury Case

    TACOMA, Wash. — Experts retained by a man who says he was injured after years of strenuous work on the railroad can testify, a Washington federal judge ruled, rejecting the railroad’s arguments that the expert’s testimony is inadmissible under Federal Rule of Evidence 702 and Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc.

  • July 10, 2025

    District Court Properly Excluded Portions Of Expert Witness Testimony, Panel Says

    ATLANTA — A district court did not err in excluding portions of an expert’s witness testimony because the expert witness’s opinions on the cause of the insured’s water and mold damages and the insurer’s alleged bad faith conduct were not disclosed before the insurer’s deposition of the expert witness as required under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(2)(B), the 11th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals said July 9 in affirming the district court’s ruling.

  • July 09, 2025

    Device Maker Tells High Court Shortened Discovery Timeline Tainted Patent Trial

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — A medical product company tells the U.S. Supreme Court that a North Carolina federal court violated its due process rights by changing both the time to trial and the time for discovery in a patent infringement case for which the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals has already ordered a new trial.

  • July 08, 2025

    Expert’s Exclusion Dooms Design Defect Case Alleging Faulty Blender Exploded

    NEWARK, N.J. — A New Jersey federal judge granted a motion to exclude an expert’s testimony in a woman’s case alleging that a defectively designed blender exploded and caused injuries, further ruling that without expert testimony to prove causation, the manufacturer is entitled to summary judgment.

  • July 08, 2025

    Ga. Appeals Court Upholds Decision To Exclude Experts As Unreliable In Mold Case

    ATLANTA — A Georgia trial court did not abuse its discretion in finding that an expert in a lawsuit alleging injuries caused by mold exposure could not testify because the proposed testimony was unreliable, a Georgia appeals court said.

  • July 07, 2025

    Police Practices Expert Can Testify For Man Suing Philadelphia, Former Officers

    PHILADELPHIA — An expert retained by a man who spent 30 years in prison after being wrongfully convicted of murder can testify on police practices, specifically that Philadelphia was on notice of allegations of corruption and improper police work from its homicide detectives.

  • July 03, 2025

    Judge Says Ethicon’s Expert Can Testify On Conditions Of Pelvic Mesh Devices

    LEXINGTON, Ky. — The Kentucky federal judge presiding over a long-running case against a pelvic mesh manufacturer denied a woman’s motion to exclude a female pelvic medicine and reconstructive surgery expert from testifying for Ethicon Inc., finding that the doctor’s testimony is reliable.

  • July 02, 2025

    Magistrate Judge: Testimony Limited To Facts Disclosed In Expert Report, Deposition

    MIAMI — A Florida federal magistrate judge ruled that experts retained by a man who alleges that he was rendered paraplegic due to a fall aboard a Carnival Corp. cruise ship cannot offer testimony based on opinions that were not disclosed in their expert witness reports or depositions but refused to exclude their testimony.

  • June 24, 2025

    Experts Featured In Mealey's Daubert Report

    Entries are in alphabetical order of the expert in each area of expert testimony.  Experts appeared in the January, February, March, April, May and June 2025 issues of Mealey’s Daubert Report.

  • June 24, 2025

    Judge Allows Opposing Experts To Testify On Damages In Breached Contract Case

    SHREVEPORT, La. — A Louisiana federal judge in a pair of orders largely denied motions to exclude expert testimony in a dispute alleging that a company breached a contract by entering mineral-related surface agreements with third parties, finding that most of the challenges go to weight and not admissibility.

  • June 24, 2025

    Federal Judge Won’t Allow Fingerprint Expert To Testify In Carjacking Death Case

    SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico — An expert retained by a criminal defendant is clearly qualified to opine on latent fingerprint identification, but his proposed testimony on whether a print fragment indicates that it was left by someone wearing a glove or covering is beyond his area of expertise, a federal judge in Puerto Rico ruled.