Legal Opinion
Colombo v. CMI Corp.
District Court, W.D. New York
Decided November 16, 1998No. 6:96-cv-06028PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
DECISION AND ORDER
LARIMER, Chief Judge.
Defendant CMI Corporation (“defendant” or “CMI”) moves to exclude the testimony of Dr. Igor Paul, an expert retained by plaintiffs Valentine and Margaret Colombo (“plaintiffs”). Plaintiff, Valentine Colombo, suffered serious injuries in the course of his employment while working with a piece of road construction equipment called a pavement profiler. Dr. Paul is expected to give testimony and opinions concerning certain design defects in the pavement profiler. For the reasons that follow, defendant’s motion is in all respects denied.
The Legal Standards
The…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Jules R. Viterbo, Et Ux, (Patricia Viterbo) v. The Dow Chemical Co.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1987
- Geraldine McCULLOCK, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. H.B. FULLER COMPANY, Defendant-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1995
- Zuchowicz v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1998
- Eleanor M. Stagl v. Delta Air Lines, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1997
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Colon Ex Rel. Molina v. Bic USA, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 2001
- Milliman v. Mitsubishi Caterpillar Forklift America, Inc.District Court, N.D. New York · 2009