Jump to Navigation
Jump to Content

Testimony by experts

Dura Auto Sys. of Ind., Inc. v. CTS Corp.

The court affirms a district court's disqualification of an expert witness and dismissal of a company's third-party Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act complaint against a manufacturer for the...

Martin v. Shell Oil Co.

The court holds that expert testimony offered by two Connecticut individuals suing an oil company for damages caused by methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE) contamination is admissible and that all but two of the individuals' causes of...

Stockton, City of v. Albert Brocchini Farms, Inc.

The court affirms a trial court's exclusion of the testimony in an eminent domain case of a property owner's expert as to the value of the property if it was operated as a landfill. A city initiated an eminent domain action over the...

Bonner v. ISP Technologies, Inc.

The court affirms a district court decision upholding a jury verdict ordering the manufacturer of an organic cleaning solvent to pay an assembly line worker $2.2 million in damages for injuries she sustained after being sprayed with the...

Nelson v. Tennessee Gas Pipeline Co.

The court affirms a district court decision excluding the testimony of individuals' two expert witnesses in a suit alleging that polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) contamination from a natural gas pumping station injured the individuals....

U.S. Sugar Corp. v. Henson

The court holds that expert testimony offered by an individual alleging permanent and total disability due to pesticide exposure in the workplace is admissible under Frye v. United States, 93 F. 1013 (D.C. Cir. 1923). The...

Goeb v. Tharaldson

The court holds that the standard for admissibility of novel scientific evidence set forth in Frye v. United States, 293 F. 1013 (D.C. Cir. 1923), and State v. Mack, 292 N.W.2d 764 (Minn. 1980), rather than the...

St. Martin v. Mobil Exploration & Producing U.S. Inc.

The court affirms a district court decision holding oil companies liable for $240,000 in damages for failing to adequately maintain spoil banks on canals operated by them, resulting in damage to a freshwater flotant marsh in Terrebone...

Waterville Indus., Inc. v. Finance Auth. of Me.

The court holds that a trial court improperly excluded evidence central to a wool processing mill owner's case against the Finance Authority of Maine (FAME) under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act...

Goebel v. Denver & Rio Grande W. R.R.

The court reverses and remands a district court decision finding a railroad company liable for an employee's injuries because the district court improperly admitted expert testimony. The court first holds that the district court abused...