Crouch et al v. Teledyne Continental Motors, Inc.
ORDER denying 337 Motion for Reconsideration. Signed by Judge Kristi K. DuBose on 7/8/2011. (sdb)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
LARRY DALE CROUCH,
RHONDA MAE CROUCH,
TEDDY LEE HUDSON, and
CAROLYN SUE HUDSON,
TELEDYNE CONTINENTAL MOTORS,
CIVIL ACTION NO. 10-00072-KD-N
This action is before the court on the plaintiffs’ motion to reconsider in part1 the order
granting defendant’s motion to strike and exclude the expert testimony of Robert Pearce and James
Hall (doc. 337, see also order at doc. 314, defendant’s motion at doc. 242). Upon consideration
and for the reasons set forth herein, the motion (doc. 337) is DENIED.
Plaintiffs request that this court reconsider its order excluding James Pearce's testimony,
arguing that the court was incorrect in its conclusion that Mr. Pearce had conducted an independent
investigation. In support, the plaintiffs belatedly point to portions of Pearce's deposition which
support their position. This information was not argued in either plaintiffs’ written response or at
oral argument. To the extent that plaintiffs relied on the court to read non-designated portions of
the submitted depositions to find support for plaintiffs’ position, such reliance was misplaced.
Such an expectation is unreasonable in light of the literally thousands of pages that have been
submitted to the court for pre-trial review. The court determined the issue based on the information
Plaintiffs did not move the court to reconsider the order as to James Hall.
contained in Mr. Pearce's report and cited deposition regarding his experience. In the report Mr.
Pearce only states that he reviewed "relevant documents". Moreover, the court does not find that
Mr. Pearce's absence prevented plaintiffs from making an adequate argument or presenting
DONE and ORDERED this the 8th day of July, 2011.
s / Kristi K DuBose
KRISTI K. DuBOSE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?