-
Fla. 1st DCA·
2019-06-18
Section 440.13(9)(c), which creates a presumption of correctness for EMA opinions, does not violate separation of powers because the Legislature has authority over evidentiary matters in workers' compensation proceedings and the supreme court lacks rulemaking authority over worke
-
Del. Super. Ct.·
2019-05-31
The Delaware Superior Court granted Monsanto's Daubert motion in part, denying it as to certain of Plaintiffs' experts (Drs. Ritz, Weisenburger, Portier, and Jameson) but granting it as to others (Drs. Neugut and Nabhan). The court denied Monsanto's motion for summary judgment, f
-
128 La. 1·
M.D. Fla.·
2019-05-31
The court held that the defendant's motion to exclude expert testimony was denied because any deficiencies in the expert's Rule 26 disclosure were harmless, as the defendant had ample opportunity to address them but failed to do so.
-
268 So. 3d 254·
Fla. 2d DCA·
2019-04-12
An expert need not be a statistician to testify regarding statistical significance of a DNA match if the expert demonstrates sufficient knowledge of the database grounded in study of authoritative sources.
-
122 La. 507·
S.D. Fla.·
2019-03-08
The court held that the plaintiff lacked Article III standing because the assignment agreement was inadmissible and void under New York law, thus the action must be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
-
Del. Super. Ct.·
2019-03-06
The trial court did not err in denying the Defendant's motion in limine to exclude Google Wi-Fi Location Data, finding the evidence reliable and admissible under the Daubert standard. The court determined that the technology is testable, has undergone peer review, is verified by
-
Del. Super. Ct.·
2019-01-31
The court denied Ford's renewed motion for judgment as a matter of law and its motion for a new trial or remittitur. The court found that the jury's causation findings were not inconsistent and that the damages awarded were not excessive or the result of passion or prejudice. The
-
262 So. 3d 244·
Fla. 2d DCA·
2018-12-28
A defendant states a facially sufficient claim for ineffective assistance of trial counsel when he alleges that counsel failed to adequately object to DNA statistical evidence testimony, and the record does not conclusively refute that the State failed to establish the witness's
-
266 So. 3d 1201·
Fla. 1st DCA·
2018-12-27
Expert testimony regarding building defects was properly admitted because the methodology employed was based on established, peer-reviewed industry standards and was not novel, requiring no Frye analysis. The jury had sufficient evidence to support verdicts finding actual damages
-
Fla. 3d DCA·
2018-12-12
The trial court did not abuse its discretion in excluding the forensic toxicologist's opinion on habitual addiction to alcohol, as medical diagnosis of alcohol use disorder falls outside the expert's field of expertise in forensic toxicology and requires qualifications the expert
-
108 La. 479·
S.D. Fla.·
2018-10-19
The court held that the plaintiff failed to establish standing because it did not provide competent evidence of assignment approval required by the Medicare Secondary Payer Act.
-
30 La. 1282·
S.D. Fla.·
2018-08-29
The court held that a website can be a place of public accommodation under the ADA if it facilitates the use of physical stores, and that the defendant's website violated the ADA due to accessibility barriers preventing a visually impaired plaintiff from using its services.
-
Fla. 1st DCA·
2018-06-18
A K-9 handler's testimony that his trained dog could detect odors from a person in an anxious or fleeing state is admissible lay opinion under Florida Statute § 90.701 and does not require expert qualification under § 90.702 or Daubert. Defense counsel cannot be deficient for fai
-
Del. Super. Ct.·
2018-05-08
The court denied plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment on comparative negligence and mitigation of damages, finding genuine issues of material fact. The court granted in part and denied in part various motions in limine, ruling on the admissibility of subsequent remedial measur
-
Del. Super. Ct.·
2018-02-15
The court denied the defendants' renewed motion for judgment as a matter of law, motion for a new trial, and motion for remittitur, affirming the jury's $3 million verdict. The court found that the expert testimony was admissible, the jury's verdict was supported by competent evi
-
Del. C.P.·
2018-01-19
The court denied the defendant's motion to suppress the intoxilyzer test results. The court found that while the investigating officer violated a Delaware State Police (DSP) standard operating procedure by failing to ask the defendant to remove his dentures, this violation did no
-
M.D. Fla.·
2017-06-27
The court held that the insurer had a reasonable basis to rely on the intoxication exclusion, and therefore its denial of benefits was not arbitrary and capricious.
-
212 So. 3d 1140·
Fla. 5th DCA·
2017-03-17
The court denied the petition for writ of certiorari, finding no departure from essential requirements of law causing irreparable harm.
-
Del. Ch.·
2017-03-03
The court held that the defendants did not meet their burden of proof regarding the ownership of certain equipment, finding that prior oral agreements were superseded by the stock purchase agreement's entireties clause. The court also found that the defendants' set-off countercla
-
Del.·
2016-11-29
The court held that an injured worker's immigration status is not relevant to determining whether they are a prima facie displaced worker. However, immigration status is a relevant factor when determining if a worker is actually displaced and when an employer bears the burden of
-
Del. Super. Ct.·
2016-11-07
The trial court properly denied the defendant's motion in limine to preclude the plaintiff's expert witness from testifying. The expert's opinion was found to be based on sufficient facts and data, reliable principles and methods, and was reliably applied to the facts of the case
-
2016 WL 2621628·
S.D. Fla.·
2016-05-06
The court held that a plaintiff's motion to substitute an expert witness, filed significantly after discovery deadlines and based on the original expert's unreliability due to inadequate preparation, does not establish good cause for modifying the scheduling order.
-
Del. Super. Ct.·
2016-02-26
The Court GRANTED in part and DENIED in part Defendants' Daubert Motion to Exclude the Testimony of Mr. Scott D. Reynolds. The Court found Reynolds qualified and his opinions generally reliable and relevant, but excluded his testimony regarding the concentrations and dispersion o
-
2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 150542·
S.D. Fla.·
2015-10-19
The court held that the officers were entitled to qualified immunity as they had arguable probable cause for the arrest, and that the plaintiff failed to establish a gender discrimination claim or municipal liability.
-
2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 177734·
M.D. Fla.·
2015-08-19
The court held that the plaintiffs failed to present sufficient evidence to create a genuine issue of material fact regarding a defect in the vehicle or proximate causation, entitling the defendant to summary judgment.
-
2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 99631·
S.D. Fla.·
2015-07-14
The court held that the plaintiffs' motion to exclude expert testimony was denied because the expert's qualifications and methodology were sufficiently reliable, and disclosure deficiencies were harmless.
-
Del. Super. Ct.·
2015-02-26
The court deferred a decision on the defendant's motions to exclude the testimony of the plaintiff's two expert witnesses, Dr. Gillum and Dr. Barnes. The court found that the plaintiff had not met the burden of establishing the relevance and reliability of the experts' testimony
-
Del. Super. Ct.·
2015-01-30
The court granted the defendant's motion for summary judgment, finding that the plaintiff could not establish proximate cause for his legal malpractice claim. The court reasoned that the plaintiff's alleged occupational disease claim was fundamentally flawed because exposure to m
-
Del. Super. Ct.·
2014-12-20
The Superior Court denied the plaintiff's motions to disqualify counsel, for an evidentiary hearing, to exclude the defendant's expert, and for transport. The court found that the plaintiff failed to meet the burden of proving by clear and convincing evidence that the lead attorn
-
9th Cir. Ct. App. Div.·
2014-08-06
Kyle Scanlon petitioned for certiorari review of an administrative agency's final order suspending his driver's license for driving with an unlawful breath-alcohol level of 0.191-0.192. The appellate court affirmed the suspension, rejecting Scanlon's challenges based on due proce
-
9th Cir. Ct. App. Div.·
2014-06-03
Michael Scoma petitioned for certiorari review challenging the Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles' suspension of his driver's license following a DUI arrest. The Ninth Judicial Circuit affirmed the license suspension, finding that the officer had proper groun
-
2014 WL 1745074·
S.D. Fla.·
2014-05-01
Summary judgment is granted because Plaintiffs failed to produce sufficient admissible evidence of a defect in the vehicle or that the alleged defect was the proximate cause of their injuries.
-
Del. Super. Ct.·
2014-02-26
The court granted summary judgment for the defendants on the negligence and negligent infliction of emotional distress claims, finding that expert testimony was required to establish proximate cause for the alleged electric shocks and that the plaintiffs failed to provide such te
-
9th Cir. Ct. App. Div.·
2013-12-09
Milunski challenges the administrative suspension of his driver's license for driving with an unlawful breath alcohol level, arguing the breath test results were improperly admitted under Daubert and that he was denied due process. The court affirms the suspension, holding that t
-
Del. Super. Ct.·
2013-08-27
The court denied the defendant's motion for summary judgment and motion to preclude expert testimony. The court found that the plaintiff presented sufficient evidence to create genuine issues of material fact regarding the existence of a hazardous condition and the defendant's no
-
Del.·
2013-08-16
The Delaware Supreme Court affirmed the Superior Court's decision to apply Texas substantive law and Delaware procedural law, finding that the plaintiffs waived arguments for California or Delaware substantive law. However, the Court remanded the case for the Superior Court to de
-
836 F. Supp. 2d 148·
S.D. Fla.·
2013-08-15
The court held that both parties' motions to exclude expert testimony were denied, finding the experts qualified and their methodologies sufficiently reliable under the Daubert standard.
-
810 F. Supp. 2d 815·
S.D. Fla.·
2013-07-24
The court denied the plaintiff's motion to amend the complaint to add a non-diverse party because the primary purpose appeared to be defeating diversity jurisdiction, and the plaintiff had been dilatory and would not be significantly prejudiced.
-
521 F. Supp. 2d 1185·
S.D. Fla.·
2013-02-27
The court held that it misapplied prior case law and that a lender who takes title to a condominium project and offers units for sale is a 'developer' subject to statutory implied warranties, even if it did not perform the construction.
-
1990 WL 16793·
M.D. Fla.·
2013-02-07
The court granted the defendant's motion to apply New Jersey law to punitive damages, finding New Jersey has a more significant relationship to that issue. The court also denied the defendant's motion to exclude expert Suzanne Parisian without prejudice, finding her testimony gen
-
Del. Ch.·
2012-07-20
The Court denied Defendants' motion to supplement the record, finding they failed to demonstrate excusable neglect or diligence in producing evidence they possessed. The Court also denied Defendants' motion for reargument on most grounds, except for a stipulated correction to the
-
M.D. Fla.·
2012-06-04
The court held that the expert's testimony regarding Shore D testing was inadmissible due to a violation of discovery rules and Daubert standards, warranting exclusion and judgment as a matter of law.
-
Del. Super. Ct.·
2012-04-20
The court granted defendants' motions in limine to exclude the testimony of William Kunzman, P.E., and Walter Kilareski, P.E., finding their opinions unreliable or unsubstantiated by scientific principles. The court denied the motion to exclude the testimony of Frederick G. Breme
-
643 F. App'x 54·
S.D. Fla.·
2012-02-22
The court granted in part and denied in part the motion in limine, precluding the plaintiffs police expert from testifying on deliberate indifference and custom/practice of excessive force, but allowing testimony on the use of force.
-
Del. Super. Ct.·
2011-10-21
The Court granted Defendants' Motion to Exclude Plaintiff's Causation Experts and Motion for Summary Judgment. The Court found that Plaintiff's experts failed to establish a prima facie case of proximate causation because their opinions did not reliably link Mr. Collins' AML to h
-
50 So. 3d 1166·
Fla. 4th DCA·
2010-12-15
The Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed summary judgment for defendants in a products liability action where the trial court excluded plaintiff's sole causation expert, Dr. Bruce Jafek, under the Frye test. The court held that under Florida Supreme Court precedent in Marsh v
-
Del. Ch.·
2010-10-05
The court denied the plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction, finding that they were unlikely to succeed on the merits of their claims. The court determined that the target's board of directors acted reasonably in conducting the sales process, negotiating the merger agree
-
Del. Super. Ct.·
2010-08-30
The court granted the defendants' motion in limine to exclude the expert testimony of Dr. John Postlethwaite, D.C. The court found that Dr. Postlethwaite's opinion on causation lacked a proper factual foundation because it was based on an erroneous medical history that failed to
-
Del.·
2010-05-11
The Superior Court properly excluded the plaintiff's expert testimony on causation because it lacked a sufficient factual foundation, rendering the plaintiff unable to establish a prima facie case of negligence. Therefore, the judgment of dismissal is affirmed.
-
434 B.R. 650·
M.D. Fla.·
2010-04-09
The court affirmed the bankruptcy court's order confirming the plans of reorganization, finding them feasible and that the cramdown interest rate was properly determined.