Nutley v. River Falls Machinery, Inc. et al

Filing 236

MINUTE ORDER by District Judge James H. Payne: granting in part and denying in part 174 Defendant's Motion in Limine (cjt, Deputy Clerk)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA Paula J. Nutley, Plaintiff(s), Case Number: 09-CV-215-JHP vs. River Falls Machinery Sales, Inc., et al., Defendant(s). MINUTE ORDER At the direction of James H. Payne, U.S. District Judge, it is hereby ordered that: Defendant’s Daubert Motion, or in the Alternative Motion in Limine No. 1 (Dkt.# 174) is granted in part and denied in part as follows: Defendant’s Expert, Tom Curtis (“Curtis”) shall be allowed to testify as an expert reconstructionist. His testimony, however, shall not go beyond the realm of accident reconstruction. The Tenth Circuit has stated that accident reconstruction may testify as to such matters including, but not limited to vehicle mass; dimensions of vehicles involved in collisions; road surface textures; and operating characteristics of vehicles. BNSF Ry. Co. v. LaFarge Southwest, Inc., 2009 WL 4279843 (D.N.M. 2009) citing Brandt v. French, 638 F.2d 309, 311 (10th Cir. 1981). Curtis shall not be allowed to testify outside the confines of his subject area. Therefore, Curtis shall not be allowed to testify in regard to the fields of mechanical engineering or metallurgy. Further, Curtis will not be allowed to testify concerning the “standard of care” in a negligence action, or in regard to state and federal statutes and regulations with respect to motor carriers. This includes testimony concerning the necessity of safety chains and/or draw rings. Such testimony would infringe upon the role of the court at trial to instruct the jury on the law. Dated this 30th day of June, 2011. William B. Guthrie, Clerk of Court, United States District Court s/C. Trzcinski By: C. Trzcinski, Deputy Clerk

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?