![]() The Court of Appeals holds that "sufficient facts must underlie the expert's opinions that indicate the use of 'reliable principles and methodology in support of the expert's conclusions' so that the opinion constitutes more than mere speculation or conjecture." Id. 426, 478, 71 A.3d 105 as supplemented on denial of reconsideration, 433 Md. The sufficient-factual-basis "factor includes two sub-issues: factual basis and methodology." Exxon Mobil Corp. Maryland Courts, thus, consider it "well settled that the trial judge-not the expert witness-determines where there exists an adequate factual basis for the opinion at issue." Wood v. This "is a determination that must be made by the trial court." Food Lion v. Maryland Rule 5-702 conditions the admissibility of a qualified expert's relevant testimony on a trial judge finding that "a sufficient factual basis exists to support the expert testimony." Md. Maryland Rule 5-702 and the Frye-Reed Standard Hammermill's opinions must be excluded in this case pursuant to Maryland Rule 5-702 and Frye-Reed. As a result, and for the reasons set forth more fully below, Dr. Hammermill lacked a sufficient factual basis for his opinions due to him using an unreliable methodology because of a bias toward Crawford United Healthcare. During his deposition, it was clear that Dr. Hammermill was deposed on September 5, 2018. Hammermill based his opinions solely upon the medical records in this case.ĭr. performed a records review in this case and reached the conclusion that "within a reasonable degree of medical probability… at the most, two physician visits, and two weeks of physical therapy or chiropractic treatment reflect treatment that was reasonable, medically necessary, and causally related to the injury of September 23, 2018." See Exhibit 1. She receive the majority of her medical treatment from September 2018 until 2019 from Crawford United Healthcare As a direct and proximate result of the collision, the Plaintiff sustained severe and permanent injuries to her neck and back. ![]() This case involves an automobile collision between the Plaintiff and Defendant that occurred on Septemin Baltimore City, Maryland. Hornage and in support thereof states as follows: Introduction ![]() from Testifying at Trial Pursuant to Maryland Rule 5-702, Frye-Reed, and Falik v. Plaintiff, by and through undersigned counsel, hereby files this Motion in Limine to Exclude Defense Expert Robert Hammermill, M.D. FROM TESTIFYING AT TRIAL PURSUANT TO MARYLAND RULE 5-702, FRYE-REED, AND FALIK V. Sample Frye-Reed Motion to Exclude Expert PLAINTIFF'S MOTION IN LIMINE TO EXCLUDE DEFENSE EXPERT This type of motion should be filed in many injury and malpractice cases to keep defendants honest by requiring them to proffer only experts that have a sound basis for their opinions. But we need to go on the offensive if we want to win. This is not a motion plaintiffs' lawyers usually file. Below is a sample Frye-Reed (Daubert in federal court) motion we filed in Baltimore City to exclude an expert based on unsound methodology in formulating opinions.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |