Ouandji v. Hedglen et al
Filing
48
MEMORANDUM OPINION denying without prejudice 33 Plaintiff's Daubert Motion. Signed by Honorable Robin J. Cauthron on 04/05/18. (wh)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
STEVEN ADRIEN OUANDJI,
Plaintiff,
vs.
VINCENT HEDGLEN, and the
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
ex rel. UNITED STATES POSTAL
SERVICE,
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
No. CIV-16-1303-C
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
On December 14, 2015, Plaintiff was riding his skateboard southbound in the
southbound lane of a public street in Norman, Oklahoma.
A mail truck owned by
Defendant, United States Postal Service, and operated by Defendant’s employee who was
acting in the course and scope of his employment, struck Plaintiff from behind. Plaintiff
now seeks to recover damages for the injuries, while Defendants have filed a counterclaim,
seeking to recover damages to the mail truck.
Plaintiff has filed a Motion pursuant to Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals,
Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993), seeking to exclude certain portions of Defendants’ expert Mark
Sexton’s testimony. Because this matter is brought pursuant to the Federal Tort Claims
Act, it will be tried to the Court without a jury. Consequently, the issues raised in
Plaintiff’s Motion can be addressed during the trial and in the context of the challenged
testimony. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s Motion will be denied without prejudice to rearguing
the issues during trial.
For the reasons set forth herein Plaintiff’s Daubert Motion Regarding Defendant’s
Accident Reconstruction Expert (Dkt. No. 33) is DENIED without prejudice.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 5th day of April, 2018.
2
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?