16 results for 'cat:"Vehicle" AND cat:"Experts"'.
J. Kennedy finds that the lower court improperly found for the restaurant on a man's negligence claim alleging it failed to provide adequate protective barrier to prevent cars from crashing into the restaurant. The man was injured when another patron drove her car into a parking space and continued through the wall into the restaurant. This kind of vehicle crash was reasonably foreseeable and a jury would not need an expert to explain that providing parking elsewhere besides directly in front of the restaurant would have avoided the accident. Reversed.
Court: Illinois Appellate Court, Judge: Kennedy, Filed On: April 9, 2024, Case #: 230026, Categories: vehicle, Negligence, experts
J. Clayton finds that the lower court properly awarded the estate $20 million in a wrongful death suit stemming from a fatal car accident with an 18-wheeler. The court properly excluded a medical expert's testimony on the issue of whether the driver was impaired based on her daily use of marijuana on the basis that it was not reliable or relevant. The doctor was unable to cite any specific behavior exhibited by the mother to support a finding she was impaired except that she lost control of her car. Affirmed.
Court: Missouri Court Of Appeals, Judge: Clayton, Filed On: March 26, 2024, Case #: ED111241, Categories: vehicle, experts
J. Horton finds the trial court improperly excluded a toxicology report showing the decedent was impaired at the time of a car collision in this wrongful death suit. The decedent's parents allege the driver of a flatbed truck was negligent for failing to keep a proper lookout and for blocking both lanes of travel when their daughter collided with the trailer at more than 90 mph. The report was probative and relevant to the jury’s decision regarding what percentage of fault to allocate to the decedent in apportioning the fault between both drivers. Reversed.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Horton , Filed On: February 22, 2024, Case #: 09-21-00372-CV, Categories: vehicle, experts, Wrongful Death
J. Reidinger denies the passenger in a car collision his motion to voluntarily dismiss the court’s exclusion of expert testimony he brought against a car manufacturer. The manufacturer claims the expert’s testimony is flawed because his recreation of the collision was inaccurate. Also, a voluntary dismissal would not take into account the significant expense the manufacturer has paid in service of the litigation so far. Thus, the motion is denied, but the expert will be allowed to recreate the crash study and submit it to the manufacturer at the expense of the passenger.
Court: USDC Western District of North Carolina, Judge: Reidinger, Filed On: February 16, 2024, Case #: 1:23cv112, NOS: Motor Vehicle Product Liability - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: Evidence, vehicle, experts
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. White grants the insurer's motion to exclude plaintiff's expert testimony regarding how the insurer departed from industry standards in handling the plaintiff's motor vehicle claim because she is a legal expert, not an expert on insurance industry standards. The insurer's partial motion for summary judgment is also granted limiting the amount of uninsured motor vehicle coverage to $25,000.
Court: USDC Eastern District of Missouri, Judge: White, Filed On: January 18, 2024, Case #: 4:22cv724, NOS: Insurance - Contract, Categories: Insurance, vehicle, experts
J. Fox finds the trial court properly admitted the injured driver's expert testimony about her impairment rating after the injuries sustained in the car collision. Although the American Medical Association guidelines are typically used in workers' compensation cases, the evidence was relevant in this case and allowed the jury to make a proper damages calculation based on the severity of the injuries, while the at-fault driver was also able to thoroughly cross-examine the expert about his findings. Affirmed.
Court: Colorado Court Of Appeals, Judge: Fox, Filed On: January 18, 2024, Case #: 2024COA8, Categories: vehicle, Negligence, experts
J. Pham denies the waste collection defendants' motion in limine seeking to exclude certain expert testimony in this case involving a motor vehicle collision. The expert's credentials, which include certification as a Master Automotive Technician, "qualify him as an expert in the field of accident reconstruction," and he independently reviewed the evidence in the case.
Court: USDC Western District of Tennessee , Judge: Pham, Filed On: November 21, 2023, Case #: 2:21cv2474, NOS: Motor Vehicle - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: Tort, vehicle, experts
J. Wu grants the government's motion to exclude improperly disclosed witnesses and limit the testimony of certain witnesses in the driver's lawsuit alleging that a U.S. Postal Service mail-delivery truck driver negligently merged into the driver's lane, causing a collision. Among other errors, the driver does not provide proper expert disclosures for her non-retained treating physicians, and she does not provide a summary of facts as to how these individuals would testify about her injuries.
Court: USDC Central District of California, Judge: Wu, Filed On: November 17, 2023, Case #: 2:22cv3290, NOS: Motor Vehicle - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: vehicle, experts, Discovery
J. Hicks affirmed granting a motion to dismiss filed by the Department of Transportation, but reversed motions for summary judgment granted to two construction companies against a couple who sued them for failing to clear a clogged catch basin, which caused flooding that led to the couple hydroplaning and suffering a car accident in which they were injured. The orders striking the couple’s expert reports are also reversed. The department is immune from liability in this case because there is no evidence that it knew of the clogged basin and flooding before the accident, and the fact that it owns the highway where it occurred does not make it liable. The opinions of two engineers were struck and the companies’ motions for summary judgment granted because the opinions were considered speculative but the opinions don't have to be flawless. Even if someone else could come to a different conclusion with the information the experts had, a reasonable person could have come to the same conclusions as they did.
Court: New Hampshire Supreme Court, Judge: Hicks, Filed On: August 16, 2023, Case #: 2022-0101, Categories: vehicle, experts, Premises Liability
[Consolidated.] J. Atchley partially grants the Kia defendants' motions to exclude certain expert testimony in this product liability action stemming from a fatal car collision. "Without the inadmissible evidence proffered by plaintiffs' experts," the car manufacturers are also entitled to summary judgment, and the case is dismissed accordingly.
Court: USDC Eastern District of Tennessee , Judge: Atchley, Filed On: June 23, 2023, Case #: 4:16cv117, NOS: Motor Vehicle Product Liability - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: vehicle, Product Liability, experts
J. Moore finds that the lower court improperly found for the injured plaintiff in a motor vehicle negligence suit after barring admission of impeachment evidence and testimony regarding her medical expert. Plaintiff relied heavily on the expert's testimony during closing arguments, so the failure to allow a full cross-examination of the expert was prejudicial to the defendant's case. Reversed.
Court: Illinois Appellate Court, Judge: Moore, Filed On: May 26, 2023, Case #: 220289, Categories: vehicle, Negligence, experts