Plaintiff's Motion to Strike Expert Witness and Preclude Introduction and/or Reference to Any Testimony and Reports Generated

PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO STRIKE EXPERT WITNESS AND PRECLUDE INTRODUCTION

AND/OR REFERENCE TO ANY TESTIMONY AND REPORTS GENERATED

STATE OF _____________________

IN THE _______________ COURT FOR THE COUNTY OF _____________

____________________________________

____________________________________

Plaintiffs

v.

JOHN DOE, AN INDIVIDUAL WHO IS

UNKNOWN and

AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY,

Defendants

__________________________________________________/

___________________________________________________/

Plaintiffs' Motion to STRIKE EXPERT WITNESS AND PRECLUDE INTRODUCTION AND OR REFERENCE TO ANY AND ALL TESTIMONY AND REPORTS GENERATED

NOW COMES the Plaintiff, by and through her attorneys, and for her Motion to Strike Expert Witness, _______, and Preclude Introduction and/or Reference to Any and All Testimony and Reports Generated by Said Individual, hereby states as follows:

That this claim arises out Insurance Company’s refusal to pay any first party benefits whatsoever in relation to an automobile accident that occurred on, or about, [date].

That Plaintiff was stopped at a red light when she was rear-ended by another vehicle which subsequently sped off, causing a hit and run accident.

That both Plaintiff and her five-year-old daughter sustained injuries in this accident and sought emergency medical treatment which is documented.

That eventually, the insurer of their vehicle, Insurance Company, informed Plaintiff that they were “investigating this claim,” and refused to pay no-fault benefits to which Plaintiff is lawfully entitled.

That Defendant hired an “accident reconstructionist” to review the photos of the damage to the vehicle. Interestingly, Insurance Company provided only three photographs of the damage to the vehicle, in spite of Expert’s request for any and all photographs [in total, there are at least sixteen].

That following his review of three pictures, Expert issued an entirely speculative report with non-conclusory opinions and without any scientific basis whatsoever.

That Expert readily admitted that he never took any measurements or calculations whatsoever, that he couldn’t ascertain what the additional discoloration was to the rear bumper based on the photographs, that much of his opinion was based on estimates with an error margin of several inches, and that he never inspected the vehicle.

That based solely on his review of three poor quality photographs, he incredulously opined that Plaintiff had backed into a pole!

That Plaintiff filed a Motion to Compel the Deposition of Expert on [date].

That Plaintiff’s counsel was finally able to obtain the deposition of Expert which occurred on [date].

That throughout this deposition, Expert stated the following:

He never inspected the vehicle.

He didn’t know what year the vehicle was.

One of the vehicles depicted in one of the three photographs was “perhaps the same vehicle” [emphasis added] and in another picture “ostensibly the same vehicle” [emphasis added].

He did not take any photographs of the vehicle and does not know when these photographs were taken.

Based on his review of the three photographs, he observed additional discoloration to the back of the vehicle, but was unable to determine what it was or what caused it, and did not account for it in his report.

He did not make any calculations whatsoever and no physical analysis was done. In relation to various opinions, Expert states, “and those are just estimates, of course. I haven’t measured it.”

That a careful review of Expert’s deposition testimony, combined with the report, demonstrates that Expert simply cannot offer his testimony as to causation as an “expert” where his opinions are entirely speculative and unsubstantiated by scientific calculations and measurements.

Respectfully submitted,

Attorneys for Plaintiff

_________________________________________

Dated:

STATE OF _____________________

IN THE _______________ COURT FOR THE COUNTY OF _____________

____________________________________

____________________________________

Plaintiffs

v.

JOHN DOE, AN INDIVIDUAL WHO IS

UNKNOWN and

AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY,

Defendants

__________________________________________________/

___________________________________________________/

Plaintiffs' Brief in support of ThEIR Motion to STRIKE EXPERT WITNESS AND PRECLUDE INTRODUCTION AND OR REFERENCE TO ANY AND ALL TESTIMONY

AND REPORTS GENERATED

Statement of Facts

On the evening of [date], Plaintiff was traveling home with her five-year-old daughter in a [auto brand and model] minivan. Plaintiff was traveling south on [road] in [city, state]. As she approached the intersection at [street], Plaintiff began to slow to a stop for the traffic signal. As her car slowed to a stop, she was negligently rear-ended by Defendant. At that point, Plaintiff looked behind her and Defendant had fled the scene.

Defendant now seeks to introduce an accident reconstructionist to contest the actual cause of the accident. Unfortunately, Expert was only provided with...