Elliott v. BP Exploration & Production, Inc. et al

Filing 42

ORDER AND REASONS: IT IS ORDERED that Elliott's spoliation motion 34 is DENIED. IT IS ORDERED that Defendants' Daubert motion to exclude Cook 26 is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants' motion for summary judgment 27 is GRANTED, and Elliott's claims against them are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. Signed by Judge Barry W Ashe on 11/03/2022. (am)

Case 2:13-cv-01011-BWA-DPC Document 42 Filed 11/03/22 Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

CYNTHIA ELLIOTT

CIVIL ACTION

VERSUS

NO. 13-1011

BP EXPLORATION &
PRODUCTION INC., et al.

SECTION M (2)

ORDER & REASONS
Before the Court is a motion by plaintiff Cynthia Elliott to deem admissible the opinions
of her purported general causation expert, Dr. Jerald Cook, because of the defendants’ alleged
spoliation of evidence related to the oil-spill clean-up workers’ exposure to oil and other
chemicals.1 Elliott’s spoliation motion is nearly identical to the one filed by the plaintiff, fully
briefed, and denied by this Court in Fairley v. BP Exploration & Production Inc., No. 17-3988, R.
Doc. 89 (E.D. La. Nov. 3, 2022). Accordingly, for the reasons stated in the Orders & Reasons
issued in Fairley,
IT IS ORDERED that Elliott’s spoliation motion (R. Doc. 34) is DENIED.
Also before the Court is Defendants’ Daubert motion in limine to exclude the general
causation opinions of plaintiff’s medical expert Cook2 and Defendants’ motion for summary
judgment arguing that the case should be dismissed because Elliott cannot prove general causation
without Cook’s opinions.3 Elliott responds in opposition to both motions,4 and Defendants reply
in further support of their motions.5

1

R. Doc. 34.
R. Doc. 26.
3
R. Doc. 27.
4
R. Docs. 30; 31.
5
R. Docs. 39; 41.
2

Case 2:13-cv-01011-BWA-DPC Document 42 Filed 11/03/22 Page 2 of 2

Defendants’ Daubert and summary judgment motions here are nearly identical to those
filed by Defendants, and granted by this Court, in other B3 cases.6 See, e.g., Brister v. BP Expl.
& Prod. Inc., 2022 WL 3586760 (E.D. La. Aug. 22, 2022); Burns v. BP Expl. & Prod. Inc., 2022
WL 2952993 (E.D. La. July 25, 2022); Carpenter v. BP Expl. & Prod. Inc., 2022 WL 2757416
(E.D. La. July 14, 2022); Johns v. BP Expl. & Prod. Inc., 2022 WL 1811088 (E.D. La. June 2,
2022).
Accordingly, for the reasons stated in the Orders & Reasons issued in those cases,
IT IS ORDERED that Defendants’ Daubert motion to exclude Cook (R. Doc. 26) is
GRANTED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants’ motion for summary judgment (R. Doc. 27)
is GRANTED, and Elliott’s claims against them are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
New Orleans, Louisiana, this 3rd day of November, 2022.

________________________________
BARRY W. ASHE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

6

The June 21, 2022 version of Cook’s report was used in this case. R. Doc. 26-5. The Court has reviewed
all versions of Cook’s report and concludes that none of the later versions cures the previously identified deficiencies
in his prior reports; specifically, none of Cook’s reports provides admissible general causation opinions.

2