Lawton-Davis et al v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company

Filing 98

ORDER granting 54 Motion for Protective Order; granting 59 Motion to Strike ; granting in part and denying in part 60 Motion to Strike ; denying 61 Motion ; granting in part and denying in part 62 Motion in Limine; granting 64 Motion in Limine; denying 90 Motion to Strike. See Order for Details. Signed by Judge Roy B. Dalton, Jr. on 1/8/2016. (VMF)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
ORLANDO DIVISION
ERICKA LAWTON-DAVIS; ANTHONY
DAVIS; and ZORIYAH DAVIS,
Plaintiffs,
v.

Case No. 6:14-cv-1157-Orl-37DAB

STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE
INSURANCE COMPANY,
Defendant.
ORDER
This cause is before the Court on the following:
1.

Defendant’s Motion to Compel Better Answers to Second Supplemental
Interrogatories and Supplemental Request for Production to Plaintiffs [sic]
(Doc. 53), filed October 29, 2015;

2.

Plaintiffs’ Emergency Motion for Protective Order (Doc. 54), filed
October 29, 2015;

3.

Defendant’s Daubert Motion to Limit the Causation Opinion of Robert
Martinez, M.D. (Doc. 59), filed November 6, 2015;

4.

Plaintiffs’ Motion to Strike Expert for Failure to Comply with Federal Rule of
Civil Procedure 26(a)(2)(B) and Alternative Motion to Exclude or Limit
Expert Testimony Regarding Steven Rundell, Ph.D. Pursuant to Federal
Rule of Evidence 702 and Incorporated Memorandum of Law (Doc. 60),
filed November 6, 2015;

5.

Plaintiffs’ Motion to Permit Testimony by Video Deposition (Doc. 61), filed

November 6, 2015;
6.

Defendant’s Daubert Motion to Limit Expert Testimony of Robert Masson,
M.D. (Doc. 62), filed November 6, 2015;

7.

Plaintiffs’ Motion to Strike Expert for Failure to Comply with Federal Rule of
Civil Procedure 26(a)(2)(B) and Alternative Motion to Exclude or Limit
Expert Testimony Pursuant to Federal Rule of Evidence 702 Regarding
Connie Coleman and Incorporated Memorandum of Law (Doc. 63), filed
November 6, 2015;

8.

Defendant’s Daubert Motion to Limit the Causation Opinion of Padmaja
Yatham. [sic] M.D. (Doc. 64), filed November 6, 2015;

9.

Plaintiffs’ Motion to Strike Response, or in the Alternative, Motion for Leave
to Reply (Doc. 90), filed November 30, 2015; and

10.

Plaintiff’s Motion to Strike Response, or in the Alternative, Motion for Leave
to Reply (Doc. 91), filed December 3, 2015.

In accordance with the Court’s rulings from the bench at its January 6, 2016,
Miscellaneous Hearing on all pending motions (see Docs. 92, 97 (“Hearing”)), it is hereby
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED—
1.

The Court reserves ruling on the following motion pending review of the
information and documents requested therein: Defendant’s Motion to
Compel Better Answers to Second Supplemental Interrogatories and
Supplemental Request for Production to Plaintiffs [sic] (Doc. 53). On or
before Wednesday, January 20, 2016, Plaintiffs shall provide to the Court,
in camera, the information and documents requested by Defendant as to

2

Dr. Robert Masson in accordance with the Court’s instructions from the
bench. Such information shall cover only the two-year period preceding
the November 6, 2015, close of discovery.
2.

Plaintiffs’ Emergency Motion for Protective Order (Doc. 54) is GRANTED;
however, on or before Wednesday, January 20, 2016, Plaintiffs shall
provide to the Court, in camera, the information and documents requested
by Defendant as to Central Florida Injury and Rehabilitation Center, Inc., in
accordance with the Court’s instructions from the bench. Such information
shall cover only the two-year period preceding the November 6, 2015,
close of discovery. The Court will then review the information and determine
whether it should be provided to Defendant.

3.

Defendant’s Daubert Motion to Limit the Causation Opinion of Robert
Martinez, M.D. (Doc. 59) is GRANTED.

4.

Plaintiffs' Motion to Strike Expert for Failure to Comply with Federal Rule of
Civil Procedure 26(a)(2)(B) and Alternative Motion to Exclude or Limit
Expert Testimony Regarding Steven Rundell, Ph.D. Pursuant to Federal
Rule of Evidence 702 and Incorporated Memorandum of Law (Doc. 60) is
GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. Dr. Rundell shall limit his
testimony in accordance with the Court’s instructions from the bench.
Additionally, Defendant shall make Dr. Rundell available to Plaintiffs for
limited questioning regarding the mathematical calculations omitted from
Dr. Rundell’s Rule 26 report. Plaintiffs shall notify Defendant on or before
Monday, January 18, 2016, if they intend to question Dr. Rundell in this

3

manner. Such questioning must be completed on or before Friday,
February 5, 2016.
5.

Plaintiffs’ Motion to Permit Testimony by Video Deposition (Doc. 61) is
DENIED.

6.

Defendant’s Daubert Motion to Limit Expert Testimony of Robert Masson,
M.D. (Doc. 62) is GRANTED IN PART. Dr. Masson shall not testify
regarding causation, but may testify as to the consistency between Plaintiff
Erika Lawton-Davis’s injuries and the trauma associated with the April 22,
2011 automobile accident. Defendant shall not use this ruling as a basis for
arguing that Dr. Masson was unable to reach an opinion as to causation.

7.

The Court DEFERS ruling on the following motion until the time of trial:
Plaintiffs’ Motion to Strike Expert for Failure to Comply with Federal Rule of
Civil Procedure 26(a)(2)(B) and Alternative Motion to Exclude or Limit
Expert Testimony Pursuant to Federal Rule of Evidence 702 Regarding
Connie Coleman and Incorporated Memorandum of Law (Doc. 63). The
parties shall not reference Ms. Coleman’s testimony in their opening
statements.

8.

Defendant’s Daubert Motion to Limit the Causation Opinion of Padmaja
Yatham. [sic] M.D. (Doc. 64) is GRANTED.

9.

Plaintiffs’ Motion to Strike Response, or in the Alternative, Motion for Leave
to Reply (Doc. 90 (“Plaintiffs’ Motion to Strike Response as to Dr.
Rundell”)) is DENIED. In the future, the parties are cautioned that record
material filed in conjunction with a motion or response must: (1) directly

4

relate to the matters referenced in the motion and response; (2) be
referenced with pinpoint citations; and (3) be necessary to the resolution of
the issues raised in motion. Such supporting documents may not be
“incorporated by reference” in bulk.
10.

In accordance with the Court’s ruling from the bench denying Plaintiffs’
Motion to Strike Response as to Dr. Rundell (Doc. 90), Plaintiffs’ Motion to
Strike Response, or in the Alternative, Motion for Leave to Reply (Doc. 91)
is also DENIED.

11.

The parties must comply with any additional instructions given by the Court
at the Hearing.

DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers in Orlando, Florida, on January 8, 2016.

Copies:
Counsel of Record

5