 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Mills v. State Sales6/10/2003
the jury had not yet been empaneled, the parties had not presented opening statements and no witnesses had testified before the jury. Consequently, the hearing justice prematurely granted judgment as a matter of law pursuant to Rule 50.
We suggest that a better practice when seeking to exclude all evidence of a necessary element of a cause of action in a pretrial Daubert hearing would be to join the request for the hearing with a motion for summary judgment pursuant to Rule 56 of the Superior Court Rules of Civil Procedure. Although we conclude that Rule 50 was the improper vehicle for disposing of the plaintiff's claims, that error was harmless in this case. To succeed on her personal injury claims, it was incumbent on the plaintiff to establish a causal connection between the carpet and her alleged injuries. As discussed, this connection was properly proven by expert testimony. Further, the validity of this expert evidence had to be tested in a Daubert hearing. See DiPetrillo, 729 A.2d at 686 (" uch hearings would address any genuine issue of the validity of the scientific theory to be applied in cases * * * in which evidence of toxicology * * * may be presented"). In this case, it was obvious to the trial justice and counsel that the plaintiff was unable to present any expert evidence to support her claim.
Conclusion
For the foregoing reasons, the plaintiff's appeals are denied and dismissed. The judgment of the Superior Court is affirmed. The papers in the case may be returned to the Superior Court.
Justice Flaherty did not participate.
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Rhode Island Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|