Evidence – Expert testimony

Listen to this article

U.S. Court of Appeals
For the Seventh Circuit

Civil

Evidence – Expert testimony

Where the plaintiff did not know why he fell from a ladder, the district court erred in excluding his expert’s testimony as to how a defect could have caused the fall.

“Kurt’s fall happened very quickly. He testified that he did not see or hear anything, but that the ladder suddenly moved to his left. His expert then reconstructed what happened and gave his opinion on how an alleged defect could have caused the accident. It is not the trial judge’s job to determine whether the expert’s opinion is correct. Smith, 215 F.3d at 719. Instead, under the relevancy prong, the judge is limited to determining whether expert testimony is pertinent to an issue in the case. Id. Here, the judge improperly expanded his role beyond gatekeeper to trier of fact. See Lauzon, 270 F.3d at 694 (holding that under the relevancy prong of Daubert, the opinion offered by an expert is admissible where it is ‘sufficiently related to the facts of the case such that it will aid the jury in resolving the factual dispute’); see also Lee v. Smith & Wesson Corp., 760 F.3d 523, 526 (6th Cir. 2014) (reversing the district court’s exclusion of the expert’s testimony and stating that a party may prove his case by any
relevant evidence, even though that evidence may contradict the testimony of a witness previously called by him).”

Reversed and Remanded.

14-2018 Stuhlmacher v. Home Depot U.S.A., Inc.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Indiana, Rodovich, Mag. J., Williams, J.

Full Text