-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-10-17
The court held that a defense expert's testimony was admissible, and that evidence of the plaintiff's past sexual behavior and settlement with a co-defendant was admissible under specific rules and exceptions, while other evidence was excluded.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-10-09
The court granted in part and denied in part defendants' Daubert motions, excluding the expert's second opinion and a portion of the fourth opinion.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-09-29
The court affirmed the bankruptcy court's findings on fraudulent transfer claims but reversed the order limiting where the judgment could be filed, and affirmed the dismissal of contract claims to prevent double recovery.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-09-26
The court held that expert testimony regarding the Second Report was inadmissible because it lacked reliability and would not be helpful to the jury, while testimony regarding the First Report was denied as moot.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-09-24
The court held that the plaintiff failed to present evidence that the defendant deputies' actions caused or contributed to the decedent's death, and that the Sheriff could not be held liable under a theory of respondeat superior or for a policy of deliberate indifference.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-09-24
The court held that expert opinions must be based on reliable methodology and sufficient case-specific facts, not merely general knowledge or ipse dixit.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-09-05
The court held that the defendant's motion to exclude plaintiff's expert testimony should be granted, and the plaintiff's motion to exclude defendant's expert testimony should be denied, based on Daubert standards.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-08-27
The court denied the defendants' Daubert motion to exclude the plaintiff's psychological expert, finding the expert qualified, the methodology reliable, and the testimony helpful.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-08-27
The court held that the defendant's motion to exclude the plaintiffs' expert witness testimony was denied because the expert's opinions met the reliability and helpfulness standards under Daubert and Rule 702.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-08-11
The court held that while the insurer is the real party in interest, Florida law permits the insured to sue for the use and benefit of the insurer, and granted leave to amend the complaint to clarify this.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-08-07
The court largely denied motions to exclude expert testimony, finding most proffered opinions admissible under Daubert and Rule 702, while excluding specific rebuttal testimony deemed outside an expert's purview.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-08-01
The court held that the defendants' Daubert motion to exclude the plaintiff's expert witness opinions was denied because the expert's methodology was sufficiently reliable and helpful.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2025-07-29
The court adopted the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, denying the motion to strike and granting in part and denying in part the Daubert motion.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-07-28
The court denied the petitioner's motions for summary judgment and to exclude expert testimony, finding genuine issues of material fact regarding causation and negligence.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-07-28
The court held that the defendants' motion to exclude the plaintiff's fire expert's opinions was denied because the expert's methodology was sufficiently reliable and relevant under Daubert standards.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-07-23
Robinson sued 3M for injuries allegedly caused by using the Bair Hugger forced-air warming device during her knee surgery in May 2021, claiming the device contaminated her surgical wound and caused a bacterial infection requiring additional surgeries. The district court denied 3M
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-07-22
The court held that the statements in the fire report and the fire chief's conclusions regarding the fire's origin were not expert or inadmissible lay opinions, and thus denied the motion to exclude them.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-07-21
The court held that the defendants' late disclosure of a new expert opinion regarding the cause of the fire was neither substantially justified nor harmless, and therefore excluded the opinion and supporting documents.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-07-17
The court excluded certain franchise fee testimony from a defense expert unless the plaintiff opens the door to royalty damages, but allowed other expert testimony regarding factors influencing rental profits.
-
Del.·
2025-07-10
The Delaware Supreme Court reversed the Superior Court's decision denying motions to exclude expert testimony in the Zantac litigation. The Court held that the Superior Court erred by applying a "liberal thrust" standard favoring admissibility, by concluding Delaware's evidentiar
-
S.D. Fla.·
2025-07-10
The court held that the defendant failed to meet his burden to exclude the plaintiff's expert testimony under Daubert and Rule 403.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2025-06-30
The court held that expert witnesses cannot testify about opinions or rely on materials not disclosed in their reports or depositions, but allowed specific causation and injury worsening opinions to proceed.
-
Del.·
2025-06-18
The Delaware Supreme Court affirmed the Superior Court's exclusion of an expert's causation opinion, holding that the opinion lacked a reliable scientific basis and methodology. The court found that the expert failed to demonstrate that hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy (HIE) cause
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-06-13
The court held that plaintiffs' recovery for dwelling damage is limited to actual cash value unless repairs have been completed, and contents damages are not recoverable. Breach of contract and application of the rainwater limitation remain jury questions.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2025-06-05
The court granted the motion to exclude Plaintiff's expert witnesses because they failed to meet the Daubert standard for admissibility, lacking sufficient methodology and reliable principles.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-05-29
The court held that defendants failed to meet the high standard required to strike an expert report attached to a complaint at the pleading stage.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-05-29
The court denied the plaintiff's motion to exclude expert testimony because the court had previously ruled on similar motions and would entertain more specific objections at trial.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-05-27
The court denied the defendant's motion for summary judgment, finding genuine disputes of material fact regarding the plaintiff's status and the defendant's alleged negligence, and declining to grant summary judgment on medical causation due to lack of a prior exclusion motion.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-05-16
The court granted in part and denied in part the motions to exclude expert testimony, allowing most testimony but prohibiting the use of the terms 'fraud' and 'fraudulent' by one expert.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-05-09
The court held that spoliation sanctions are unwarranted without proof of lost evidence, and a treating physician does not require a full expert report to testify on causation.
-
Del. Super. Ct.·
2025-04-30
The court addressed numerous pretrial motions in limine concerning the admissibility of expert testimony in a product liability action. The court applied the Daubert standard for expert testimony, emphasizing relevance and reliability, and outlined the five-step analysis for admi
-
S.D. Fla.·
2025-04-29
The court held that it had previously erred in denying the City of Miami's motion for summary judgment on the Monell claim, as the evidence relied upon (prior complaints without demonstrated merit, deposition testimony regarding investigation policies, and settled cases without a
-
S.D. Fla.·
2025-04-22
The court held that the officer lacked reasonable suspicion and probable cause for the arrest, and that the use of force was excessive, denying dismissal for these claims. However, the court dismissed the vicarious liability and negligent hiring/retention claims against the City
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-04-07
The court held that an expert witness may testify regarding industry practices and standards under the FCRA, but may not offer opinions on whether a party's procedures were ultimately reasonable or unreasonable, as those are legal conclusions for the court.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2025-04-02
The court granted in part and denied in part the defendant's motion to exclude expert testimony, finding some experts unqualified or their testimony unreliable, while allowing other testimony.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-03-28
The court granted in part and denied in part the motion for class certification, finding that the named plaintiffs met the requirements for standing and Rule 23(a) prerequisites for their Section 12(a)(1) claims.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2025-03-28
Mario Echevarria, a U.S. national who claims his family owned Cayo Coco, an island off Cuba, sued Expedia Group and its subsidiaries under the Helms-Burton Act for trafficking property confiscated by the Cuban government by selling hotel reservations on their websites. The court
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-03-24
A party's desire for efficiency or streamlined trial is not a sufficient ground to use deposition testimony in lieu of live testimony when the witnesses are available.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-03-07
The court held that the expert witness's testimony was admissible because he was qualified, his methodology was reliable, and his opinions were relevant and would assist the trier of fact.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-03-05
The court held that defendants' motion to exclude expert testimony was denied because the expert's opinions were based on independent judgment and relevant methodology, and the motion for sanctions was denied because the deposition was noticed after the discovery deadline.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2025-02-28
The court denied the defendants' motion to exclude the testimony of the plaintiff's expert witness on Cuban law, finding the testimony admissible under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 44.1.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2025-02-28
The court denied the defendants' motion to exclude the testimony of the plaintiff's expert on Cuban law, finding the testimony admissible under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 44.1.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-02-27
The court held that the defendants' motion to exclude the expert testimony of Robert Renz, Jr. is denied, finding his opinions relevant and admissible under Daubert.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-02-27
A neuropsychologist is qualified to offer opinions on injury causation if their methodology and findings are based on medical records and extensive testing, even if they are not a biomechanical engineer.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-02-20
The court held that the defendant's expert's opinions were based on sufficiently reliable methods and principles and were relevant and helpful to the jury.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-02-14
Military servicemembers who purchased timeshare interests from Holiday Inn Club Vacations sought class certification under the Military Lending Act (MLA), alleging that the timeshare contracts violated the MLA through mandatory arbitration, class action waiver, and jury trial wai
-
S.D. Fla.·
2025-02-13
The court held that the defendant's late disclosure of a rebuttal expert witness violated Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 26(a)(2)(C) and 26(a)(2)(D), and the failure to comply was neither substantially justified nor harmless, warranting exclusion.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-02-13
The court held that an accident reconstruction expert's opinion on which driver failed to yield the right-of-way and the lane of travel was inadmissible because it was unhelpful or unreliable, while her opinion on vehicle speed was admissible.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-02-11
Oscar Wesley Smith, convicted of second-degree murder in the 2006 killing of a homeless woman in Ruskin, Florida, sought federal habeas relief challenging his life sentence on multiple grounds of ineffective assistance of counsel and prosecutorial misconduct. The district court d
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-02-07
The court held that the expert's report was admissible under Daubert and that genuine issues of material fact existed regarding prejudice from late notice, thus denying summary judgment.