Legal Opinion
Alfred v. Caterpillar, Inc.
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
Decided August 21, 2001No. 00-6317PublishedCited by 35 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
LUCERO, Circuit Judge.
Plaintiff Christi Alfred was on active duty with the United States Navy when she was severely injured by a paver manufactured by defendant Caterpillar. In this product liability suit, she alleges the paver’s design was defective and that the defect caused her injury. At the close of her case, the district court struck the testimony of plaintiffs expert witness and granted defendant’s motion for judgment as a matter of law under Fed.R.Civ.P. 50(a). Plaintiff challenges both rulings. We again address the issue of timing of Dau-bert motions, and exercising jurisdiction…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1993
- General Electric Co. v. JoinerSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
- Atlantic Richfield Co. v. Farm Credit Bank of WichitaCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2000
- Weisgram v. Marley Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 2000
- Kirkland v. General Motors CorporationSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1974
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by35 opinions
- Quiet Technology DC-8, Inc., Quiet Technology, Inc. v. Hurel-Dubois UK LTD.Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2003
- Feliciano-Hill v. Veterans AffairsCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2006
- Davis v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 2011
- Bowers v. Norfolk Southern Corp.District Court, M.D. Georgia · 2007
- Andrew v. Depani-SparkesSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 2017
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.