35 results for 'cat:"Civil Rights" AND cat:"Experts"'.
J. Larimer allows a detainee to continue claims contending correction officers assaulted him for complaining that one of them sexually assaulted his girlfriend when she visited him at the facility, as the detainee's expert report had been timely disclosed more than 90 days before trial. Meanwhile, eyewitness testimony supports the allegation that officers participated in the assault, and evidence indicates the officers had been aware of the detainee's complaint at the time.
Court: USDC Western District of New York, Judge: Larimer , Filed On: April 17, 2024, Case #: 6:19cv6189, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: civil Rights, experts
J. Crone grants in part the opposing motions to exclude expert testimony in an employment discrimination case alleging ADA violations when a welder's conditional job offer was revoked due to the presence of methadone and Xanax in his drug screen. For instance, the expert for the employer parties may not testify about the welder's "possible diversion of his medication" since it is not relevant and is prejudicial. Also, certain statements in the report of the EEOC's rebuttal expert should be stricken for being "impermissible legal conclusions."
Court: USDC Eastern District of Texas , Judge: Crone, Filed On: March 25, 2024, Case #: 1:21cv451, NOS: Amer w/Disabilities-Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: civil Rights, Employment, experts
J. Lawless denies both an independent administrator and a police officer's motion to bar testimony of each other's expert witnesses concerning police practices and excessive force claims. Both parties failed to sufficiently challenge the qualifications of each others' experts. The fact that an expert has testified in many other similar police misconduct cases does not make his testimony inherently questionable.
Court: USDC Central District of Illinois, Judge: Lawless, Filed On: March 15, 2024, Case #: 2:17cv2183, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: civil Rights, experts
J. Rodriguez partially excludes expert testimony in a case stemming from an incident in which the officer shot a man while he was standing in his window with a rifle in his hand upon investigating an assault that occurred earlier that day. The witness was a former police officer and use-of-force expert but can't opine on facts that were still disputed in the case, such as the credibility of the officer or of the man's girlfriend.
Court: USDC Colorado, Judge: Rodriguez, Filed On: March 15, 2024, Case #: 1:21cv2715, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: civil Rights, experts, Police Misconduct
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Estudillo denies the prison healthcare service's motion to exclude the inmate's expert, Dr. Isabel Hujoel, from testifying in his lawsuit alleging that the county and Nashville healthcare company did not accommodate his celiac disease while he was in custody. Dr. Hujoel is well qualified because she is a gastroenterologist who specializes in celiac disease, and her report focuses on how the inmate suffered “acute injury and distress” due to the lack of a gluten-free diet; she does not testify as to monetary or economic damages.
Court: USDC Western District of Washington, Judge: Estudillo, Filed On: March 11, 2024, Case #: 3:20cv6106, NOS: Amer w/Disabilities - Other - Civil Rights, Categories: civil Rights, experts, Discovery
J. Godbey grants, in part, a university's motion to strike expert testimony in a sex discrimination case filed by female former student athletes. A doctor's retained by the students will not be allowed to testify on their specific injury or standard of care for athletic trainers, as he is not qualified to testify on those subjects.
Court: USDC Northern District of Texas , Judge: Godbey, Filed On: March 4, 2024, Case #: 3:18cv141, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: civil Rights, Education, experts
J. White mostly denies the competing motions to exclude expert testimony in this case concerning the use of force used by police. The court finds that the estate plaintiffs' use of force expert uses reliable methods to reach his conclusions on use of force and that his opinions "are not impermissible legal conclusions." He will not be allowed to testify, however, as to the first aid rendered or the conclusion that the officers were "deliberately indifferent."
Court: USDC Eastern District of Oklahoma, Judge: White, Filed On: February 8, 2024, Case #: 6:20cv152, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: civil Rights, experts
J. Abelson orders a murder suspect to have a mental examination for claims of being falsely accused of murder he brought against a police department, and its detectives and police officers. The suspect has alleged post-traumatic stress disorder, emotional distress, anxiety and depression from being wrongfully incarcerated and that he had to seek professional treatment. All parties dispute that the existing medical records are enough for an expert to cross examination at trial. Therefore, there is a good cause for the mental examination.
Court: USDC Maryland, Judge: Abelson, Filed On: January 11, 2024, Case #: 1:21cv3173, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: civil Rights, experts
J. Stivers rules in part for plaintiffs regarding evidence in civil rights and wrongful imprisonment claims by limiting an expert to testimony concerning general probable cause and barring him from offering legal conclusions. Meanwhile, another expert is entirely barred from testifying because police defendants failed to establish he is qualified to discuss the location of the murder victim's death based on the onset of rigor mortis.
Court: USDC Western District of Kentucky, Judge: Stivers, Filed On: January 4, 2024, Case #: 3:17cv419, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: civil Rights, experts
J. Armistead completely excludes the opinion of the widow's expert, epidemiologist Michael Freeman, from her complaint that the prison healthcare service company and its employees did not give her spouse adequate medical care while he was in custody, resulting in his death three days after he was detained. Freeman asserts that he can rule out alternative causes for the husband's death, but he does not attempt to identify these specific alternative causes, nor does the widow show that Freeman's methods for reaching his conclusions are peer-reviewed or "based on sound science."
Court: USDC Oregon, Judge: Armistead, Filed On: December 15, 2023, Case #: 3:19cv969, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: civil Rights, experts, Discovery
J. Davis allows a citizen to replace a medical expert to provide testify regarding his excessive force claims brought against Potsdam city police officers sustained during his arrest at traffic stop. His previous expert failed to respond to his counsel’s requests. The court will allow defense counsel to conduct additional deposition, to minimize any prejudice. However, the expert is precluded from providing testimony concerning allegations that the citizen suffered amnesia as a result of his injuries.
Court: USDC Northern District of New York, Judge: Stewart, Filed On: December 7, 2023, Case #: 8:23cv849, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: civil Rights, experts, Police Misconduct
J. Kobes finds a lower court properly imposed a mental competency evaluation on a defendant who was indicted for being a felon in possession of a firearm. The defendant, who suffers from schizophrenia, argued that the government was not entitled to medicate him to restore his competency in order to stand trial. However, a chief of psychiatry, chief of psychology, and a physician presented sufficient evidence in court that a proposed treatment plan that included antipsychotic medicine would improve his quality of life. Affirmed.
Court: 8th Circuit, Judge: Kobes, Filed On: December 5, 2023, Case #: 23-1164, Categories: civil Rights, Health Care, experts
J. Sands denies the company's motion to exclude the medical examiner's Taser-related medical causation opinions in a civil rights and product liability action brought by the estate administratrix arising from the decedent's death. The medical examiner concluded that the decedent died from excited delirium and that pain from Taser deployments contributed to his death. The medical examiner is familiar with the effect Tasers can have on the human body and had sufficient basis to opine that the Taser deployments caused the decedent pain. The medical examiner's testimony could help the jury understand whether the Taser deployments contributed to the decedent's death.
Court: USDC Middle District of Georgia, Judge: Sands, Filed On: September 15, 2023, Case #: 7:21cv40, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: civil Rights, Product Liability, experts
J. Estudillo grants the family's motion to exclude the testimony of Kitsap County's expert about her opinions on constitutional or legal standards regarding the family's claim that the prison healthcare services' negligent practices concerning suicide prevention led to the death of the inmate. The expert's assertion that Kitsap County providing the inmate constitutionally required minimum care is equivalent to a reasonable standard of care is improper, because it suggests that the family must prove that the county committed a constitutional violation to prove their negligence claim, which would confuse a jury about the actual legal standards for a negligence claim.
Court: USDC Western District of Washington, Judge: Estudillo, Filed On: September 11, 2023, Case #: 3:21cv5800, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: civil Rights, experts, Discovery
J. Breen affirms an order of the magistrate judge excluding the proposed expert opinion in this lawsuit alleging violations of an individual's constitutional rights against a correctional facility. The individual contends that the facility failed to protect him from assault "by other inmates, many of whom were gang members, during his incarceration." The magistrate judge found that the individual's proposed expert report does not include the methodology or principles used, however, and the individual fails to show that the magistrate judge's decision was clearly erroneous.
Court: USDC Western District of Tennessee , Judge: Breen, Filed On: September 11, 2023, Case #: 1:22cv2540, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: Civil Procedure, civil Rights, experts
J. Baker rules in favor of the Georgia Department of Corrections as to the former inmate's medical malpractice claims against it arising after his infected toe fell off while he was incarcerated. However, the board's motion for partial summary judgment is rejected as to the inmate's claims based on a doctor's alleged negligence. There is a genuine dispute of fact as to whether the doctor was a correctional healthcare employee or an independent contractor. The physician assistant failed to show that she is entitled to qualified immunity from the civil rights claim alleging deliberate indifference. The ex-inmate's motion to exclude portions of the experts' opinions is partially granted as to two doctors' opinions that the prison parties met the standard of care and as to one doctor's opinion that they did not cause the ex-inmate's injuries.
Court: USDC Southern District of Georgia, Judge: Baker, Filed On: September 8, 2023, Case #: 4:21cv277, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: civil Rights, experts, Medical Malpractice
J. Sargus grants, in part, the victim's motion in limine, ruling evidence of previous drug use is irrelevant in relation to his actions on the night he was beaten by police during an arrest and so it will be excluded. Meanwhile, the city's motion in limine to exclude testimony from the victim's expert witness is denied, as the witness's 20 years of experience as a police officer is sufficient to allow him to testify regarding whether officers had probable cause to arrest the victim, and whether the amount of force used was reasonable or necessary.
Court: USDC Southern District of Ohio, Judge: Sargus, Filed On: August 29, 2023, Case #: 2:20cv1229, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: civil Rights, Evidence, experts
J. Russell partially grants the county's motion to exclude certain expert opinion testimony in this lawsuit brought by the parents of a detainee who died while in detention, due to a perforated ulcer. The medical doctor's testimony will be limited to "her opinions concerning the quality of medical care provided" to the detainee. Also, the retired police officer will be allowed to testify as to "proper procedures for monitoring inmates or responding to emergency situations," though he cannot offer inappropriate legal conclusions.
Court: USDC Western District of Oklahoma , Judge: Russell, Filed On: August 23, 2023, Case #: 5:20cv1252, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: civil Rights, Health Care, experts
J. Reiss grants in part and denies in part Old Navy's motion to exclude testimony from the individual's expert witness. Old Navy employees allegedly falsely accused the individual of shoplifting and stated he was acting as if he was under the influence of drugs or alcohol, for which the individual claimed discrimination and false detainment. While the expert's opinion that the individual suffers from PTSD is inadmissible, the remaining aspects of his opinion may be addressed with cross examination.
Court: USDC Vermont, Judge: Reiss, Filed On: August 21, 2023, Case #: 2:21cv155, NOS: Civil Rights - Habeas Corpus, Categories: civil Rights, experts
J. Chun denies the city's motion to strike the testimony of the psychiatrist's expert regarding the psychiatrist's lawsuit alleging that the health department invaded his privacy when investigating an anonymous complaint accusing the psychiatrist of engaging in "prostitution solicitation, illicit drug use and child pornography." While the expert misspoke on some issues, his testimony relies on several documents in the record and he can “reexamine any misstatements before trial."
Court: USDC Western District of Washington, Judge: Chun, Filed On: August 17, 2023, Case #: 3:20cv6015, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: civil Rights, experts, Discovery
J. Rodriguez partially grants a motion to exclude filed by a public school district after it was sued by a former student who alleged she was sexually abused by two male teachers and that the school district ignored her outcries. One expert specializes in school responses to Title IX complaints, and while the school district argues this case does not require this “scientific, technical, or specialized knowledge,” such objections “are best saved for a motion in limine or trial.” The other expert specializes in education administration, and while he may offer relevant testimony in this area, he cannot testify on a specific incident of alleged abuse.
Court: USDC Western District of Texas , Judge: Rodriguez, Filed On: August 16, 2023, Case #: 5:21cv369, NOS: Education - Civil Rights, Categories: civil Rights, Education, experts
J. Jordan finds that the district court properly ruled in favor of the college regarding a student's claims for breach of contract and violations of Title IX. The action arose after the college found the student violated its sexual misconduct policy by sexually assaulting a female student. The male student did not claim that he was incapacitated and there is no evidence that the college discriminated against him on the basis of sex by failing to investigate the female student. The college's decision to inquire about the student's past sexual history was not suggestive of gender bias in light of an anonymous allegation that he had sexually assaulted three other female students. The student failed to show that the Title IX investigator had or acted on gender bias. The district court correctly precluded the student's expert, a history professor, from presenting opinions about the college's purported gender bias. Affirmed.
Court: 11th Circuit, Judge: Jordan, Filed On: August 14, 2023, Case #: 21-11081, Categories: civil Rights, Education, experts