-
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.·
2025-04-07
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.·
2025-02-28
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.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2024-09-03
Arnold Edmonds, a former USS Saratoga sailor alleging asbestos-induced lung cancer from shipboard exposure, sought to present expert testimony from Dr. David Zhang on causation; the court partially granted defendants' motions to exclude the testimony, barring Dr. Zhang's opinion
-
S.D. Fla.·
2024-02-01
The court granted in part and denied in part Plaintiff's motions in limine, and denied Defendant's motion in limine, allowing experts to rely on a lab report under Rule 703 and permitting a witness to testify about her own medical condition.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2024-01-16
The court granted in part defendants' motion to seal certain exhibits related to expert testimony and denied plaintiff's motions to seal portions of summary judgment filings and response exhibits.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2023-10-02
The court held that the plaintiffs' expert disclosures for non-retained treating physicians were insufficient because they failed to provide a summary of the facts and opinions to which the witnesses would testify, as required by FRCP 26(a)(2)(C)(ii).
-
M.D. Fla.·
2023-07-06
The court granted in part and denied in part motions to limit expert testimony, excluding opinions based solely on unreliable timelines and those exceeding a witness's expertise, while allowing testimony grounded in personal knowledge and established methodology.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2023-05-03
A cruise ship passenger who fell down a stairwell sued Carnival Corporation for negligence, alleging that a raised rubber anti-skid strip on the stairs created a dangerous condition. The court denied the defendant's summary judgment motion, finding genuine disputes of material fa
-
S.D. Fla.·
2022-11-14
The court granted in part and denied in part the defendants' motion to strike and exclude trial testimony, allowing the expert to testify on specific aspects of repair order analysis but excluding opinions on fraud and legal conclusions.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2022-11-10
The court granted in part and denied in part the parties' motions in limine, ruling on the admissibility of various pieces of evidence and expert testimony.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2022-10-28
The court held that certain expert opinions, related memoranda, affidavits, and hearsay references to contractor statements are inadmissible, while emails between parties and expert testimony on permit conditions are admissible.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2022-10-18
The court denied the plaintiff's motion to exclude the defendant's expert testimony, finding the expert qualified and his methodology reliable.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-10-14
The court held that plaintiff's expert disclosures were insufficient under Rule 26(a)(2) but denied the motion to strike without prejudice, allowing plaintiff an opportunity to amend.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-09-30
The court adopted the Magistrate Judge's recommendation to preclude the expert from relying on a 2017 survey, finding the argument untimely raised by one party and not a basis for exclusion by the other, while deferring discovery-related objections.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-07-19
The court granted in part and denied in part the Daubert motions, allowing expert testimony on methodology but excluding specific opinions deemed unreliable or not properly disclosed.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2022-02-16
The court held that an expert witness cannot testify about revised report sections he did not prepare or understand, and that the expert's methodology for distinguishing preexisting damage from storm damage was unreliable and untestable.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2022-01-03
The court clarified that Dr. Rosado's test results and factual observations are admissible, but not personal opinions on credibility. Dr. Lichtblau cannot testify on lumbar fusion surgery costs but can testify on other spinal conditions and future care costs. Dr. Sala can testify
-
S.D. Fla.·
2021-11-30
Summary judgment is granted because the plaintiff failed to provide expert medical testimony to establish causation for her back injuries, which are not readily apparent to a layperson and are complicated by pre-existing conditions.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2021-10-28
The court granted in part both the defendant's and plaintiff's motions in limine, precluding certain evidence and arguments from being presented at trial.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2021-10-21
The court held that the plaintiff's disclosure of damages expert Jose A. Nodal, Jr. was inadequate under Rule 26(a)(2)(B) and excluded him as a sanction. The court found that the defendant had not shown sufficient prejudice to strike causation expert Jose Uz, despite his report b
-
S.D. Fla.·
2021-09-10
The court held that a plaintiff cannot use a motion for a new trial to relitigate strategic decisions made during trial, and that unsubstantiated allegations of jury misconduct do not warrant a new trial.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2021-06-30
The court denied Corellium's motion for leave to amend its responses to requests for admission, finding that withdrawal would not subserve the presentation of the merits and would prejudice the plaintiff.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2021-04-30
The court held that evidence of prior incidents is admissible only if substantially similar, plaintiff's testimony about doctors' statements is admissible to show state of mind, and treating physicians can testify as experts if reports are provided. The court also held that evide
-
S.D. Fla.·
2021-04-21
The court held that arguments challenging an expert's reliance on disputed facts or the weight of their opinions go to admissibility, not admissibility under Daubert.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2021-03-31
The court denied the motion to strike the damages expert and granted in part and denied in part the motions in limine, allowing some evidence of claims handling and bad faith in the specific case while excluding general practices and irrelevant tests.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2021-02-22
The court held that the plaintiff's expert disclosure was insufficient and granted the plaintiff an extension of time to provide a proper expert report.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2020-12-03
South Florida civil rights organizations challenged Senate Bill 168, which prohibited local sanctuary policies for immigrants and required cooperation with federal immigration enforcement, arguing the law violated equal protection by targeting minorities. The court granted in par
-
M.D. Fla.·
2020-03-02
The court granted in part and denied in part the plaintiff's motion to exclude the defendant's medical billing expert, allowing testimony on billing reasonableness contingent on further evidence.
-
440 F. Supp. 2d 1338·
M.D. Fla.·
2006-08-01
The court deferred ruling on damages experts and denied the motion to exclude non-infringement experts, finding their testimony sufficiently reliable and relevant.
-
85 F. Supp. 2d 1236·
N.D. Fla.·
2000-02-23
The court held that the five plaintiffs were victims of intentional racial discrimination in hiring at Sunland Training Center, violating Title VII.
-
996 F.2d 94·
5th Cir.·
1993-07-13
The court held that the district court did not err in submitting a flight instruction, nor in admitting expert testimony, and that prosecutorial comments during closing arguments did not constitute misconduct or plain error.
-
989 F.2d 822·
5th Cir.·
1993-05-03
The court held that plaintiffs failed to present sufficient admissible evidence of hazardous substances on their property to withstand summary judgment under CERCLA and Mississippi state law.
-
974 F.2d 1015·
8th Cir.·
1992-09-10
The court held that the agreement remained in effect when the plaintiff purchased the oil well interest, and that the plaintiff's waiver argument failed for lack of proof. The court also affirmed the admission of expert testimony regarding the offset calculation.
-
974 F.2d 745·
6th Cir.·
1992-09-10
The court held that the trial judge did not abuse his discretion in declaring a mistrial due to juror uncertainty about the verdict's unanimity, and that no reversible error occurred in the subsequent trial.
-
973 F.2d 1499·
9th Cir.·
1992-09-08
The court held that the erroneous denial of a peremptory challenge to an alternate juror who later sat on the jury is reversible error, and that allowing impeachment of witnesses by certain misdemeanor convictions is also an error.
-
856 F.2d 753·
6th Cir.·
1988-09-08
A county's liability for bridge repair negligence under Ohio law does not preclude the affirmative defense of the injured plaintiff's contributory negligence.
-
851 F.2d 540·
1st Cir.·
1988-07-18
The court held that the district court did not err in admitting the damages expert's testimony, as it had a sufficient factual basis under Federal Rules of Evidence 703 and 705.
-
690 F.2d 337·
2d Cir.·
1982-10-08
The court held that the district court's jury instruction regarding exceeding the speed limit as prima facie evidence of unreasonableness was proper under Connecticut law, even if the speed limit was not posted.
-
671 F.2d 1067·
8th Cir.·
1980-06-09
The court held that the jury instructions, when read as a whole, were not misleading, and that the admission of expert testimony did not constitute reversible error.