Electrolux Home Prod v. Whitesell Corp

Filing 1412

ORDER denying 1299 Motion to Strike; denying 1300 Motion to Strike; denying 1301 Motion to Strike. Signed by Chief Judge J. Randal Hall on 09/30/2020. (pts)

Eu

I

!*<

U
l-Os i

I I > io

U.»J. Lv i

K I!r- i IC

MU jL-J lADlV.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA

?
,0SEP30 PH |:48

AUGUSTA DIVISION

*

WHITESELL CORPORATION,

CLERK

*

FQA.

SO.O

*

Plaintiff,

*

*

V.

CV 103-050

if

ELECTROLUX HOME PRODUCTS, INC.,
HUSQVARNA, A.B., and HUSQVARNA
OUTDOOR PRODUCTS, INC.,

*
*
5
5

Defendants.

ORDER

On
(

December

("Whitesell")
entitled

13,

filed

2019,

three

Plaintiff

substantially

Whitesell
similar

Corporation

motions,

each

Daubert Motion, Motion in Limine, and Motion to Strike,

f/

which seek to exclude the expert reports and testimony of three
experts

retained

by

Defendants

Husqvarna

A.B.

and

Outdoor Products, Inc. (collectively "Husqvarna").

Husqvarna

The experts

are Charles Phillips, David Brani, and Alan McGee.
Charles

Phillips

is

a

Certified

Public

Accountant

who

calculated the amount of damages for Husqvarna's counterclaims to
include

parties'

its counterclaim for

phase-out

breach

of contract

related

to

the

and

its

//

inventory

obligations

(Count

II)

counterclaim for breach of contract related to Whitesell's alleged

failure to supply all enforceable categories of parts (Count III).

Mr. Phillips also provided an expert rebuttal report against
Whitesell's expert, Peter J. Karutz.

David Brani has a Ph.D. in

He supervised forensic quality testing of

Mechanical Engineering.

Whitesell parts in suit and provided an expert report regarding
his

work.^

Alan McGee is a quality and supply chain expert, who

analyzed Whitesell's internal data (and Dr. Brand's test results)
to opine about Whitesell's capability to supply parts in suit at
key points in the parties' relationship.
The

motions

to

exclude

these

experts

are

not

based

upon

about their qualifications, methodology, or

Whitesell's concern

the reliability of underlying data or other sources of information.
Whitesell instead contends that the reports and testimony of these
experts are irrelevant to the issues in the case.

To put a finer

point on it, Whitesell's motions are driven by its contention that

it is entitled to summary judgment on Husqvarna's counterclaims.

^

First, Whitesell argues that Husqvarna is liable for damages
as

a

matter

of

law

for

the

failed

transition

of

Brunner

and

wireform parts through a strict application of Paragraph 3 of the

^ Specifically, Dr. Brani tested and compared a selection of parts
Dr.
to provided specifications to determine their conformity.
Brani will not be offered to testify about the legal significance
of the results under the parties' agreements or what the results
reveal about Whitesell's capabilities.
(Defs.
' Resp. to Mot. to
Exclude, Doc. No. 1351, at 11.)

2

Whitesell

filed

the

present

motions

to

exclude

Husqvarna's

experts on the same day it filed its motion for summary judgment
on Husqvarna's counterclaims, December 13, 2019.
2

I

That is, because Husqvarna failed

parties' Settlement Memorandum.

to timely transition the Brunner and wireform parts by December
31, 2003, it was obligated to supply substitute parts to make up
for

the

revenue

shortfall.

Thus,

the

experts'

reports

and

testimony respecting Whitesell's capability to supply Brunner and
wireform parts, the quality of those parts, and the damages to

Husqvarna resulting from the failed transition are irrelevant and
should

be

stricken.

position, however.

The

Court

recently

rejected

Whitesell's

The Court instead found that genuine disputes

of material fact exist with respect to the attribution of fault in
the

failed

transition.

(See Order of Sept. 10, 2020, Doc. No.

1410.)

Second, Whitesell argues that Husqvarna is not entitled to

phase-out

purchases

and

phase-out

expedite

fees

because,

as

a

matter of law, Husqvarna should have lined up alternative suppliers
in

a

timely manner.

The

Court

also

rejected this

argument in

denying Whitesell's motion for partial summary judgment.
Order of March 25, 2020, Doc. No.

1401.)

The

Court

(See

determined

that genuine disputes of material fact exist regarding whether
Husqvarna incurred damages as a result of its own delay or as a

result

of

Whitesell's

conduct

and

representations

during

the

phase-out period.

In conclusion, the Court has rejected the legal premises upon

which Whitesell's motions are based; thus, the expert reports are
3

Rather, the expert reports appear

not meaningless or irrelevant.

relevant to the genuine disputes of material fact identified in
prior

Orders.

Accordingly,

Plaintiff

Whitesell's

motions

to

exclude the expert reports and testimony of Charles Phillips, David
Brani,

and

Alan

McGee

(doc.

nos.

1301,

1299,

and

1300,

respectively) are DENIED.

ORDER ENTERED at Augusta, Georgia, thi

day of September,

2020.

J. TUmiJAL HALL< CHIEF JUDGE
UNITE
SOU

4

/states district court
RN

district of GEORGIA