This page provides links all recent cases involving challenges to VEI experts and their data or methodology to exclude expert testimony.
| Case Citation | Summary | Issues Involved |
| Achtar v. Green; Kentucky |
Male physician with cognitive, behavioral, and physical limitations |
Medical support Validity of the first disability question Rough approximation
|
| Artl v. Wright;
Ohio |
Male with some college education with a neck injury |
Second analysis assuming college completion
|
Bennett v. Hidden Valley; Missouri |
Female with head injury sustained at age 16 | |
| Bentley v. Rose; Kentucky |
Female with one year of college with back, head, shoulder, and hip injuries |
Speculative nature of analysis |
| Bernhard v. Bork;
Illinois |
Male painter with right shoulder injury and PTSD. Client has ongoing PTSD-related problems. |
Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (hereinafter referred to as PTSD) and its congruence with the definition of cognitive disability; Not a medical doctor; Use of a proxy vs. actual wage history; Application of cohort group data;
|
| Bowman v. McClendon; Indiana | Male with 7 years of education with neck and back injuries | |
| Celarek v. Rutland;
Illinois |
Female college student with head, hip, and left wrist injuries |
Being barred from testifying |
| Davis v. Abad;
Ohio |
Female, some high school with neck injury |
Residual capacity
|
| Davis v.
Henry Ford Hospital; Michigan |
Male child with hydrocephalus and seizure disorder |
Reliability of the methodology General acceptance and peer review Fringe benefits Wage growth
|
| Engle v. Urethane; Kentucky | Male, high school graduate with injuries to his head, left arm, and knee |
Medical support |
| Farina v. Hershey; Pennsylvania | Female with some college with leg injury |
Medical support Fringe benefits Probability of future disability Methodology Relevance to Ms. Farina |
| Fischer v. Whitson;
Indiana |
Male, high school graduate with bilateral eye injuries |
Peer review and general acceptance Validity of the first disability question Assessment of Mr. Fischer |
| Franks v. Caito;
Indiana |
Male, high school graduate with shoulder, neck, and head injuries |
Assessment of Mr. Franks Rodgers article |
| Garibaldo v. Bandera; Texas | Death case of two males, both with 10 years of education | |
Greene v. Johnson; Indiana |
Male high school graduate with a back injury |
Earning capacity Work disability Pre-existing condition
|
| Gruener v. Ohio Casualty; Ohio | Employment discrimination involving a female, high school graduate |
Purpose of assessment Fit of opinion |
Holland-Tucker vs. Kempf Contracting & Design, Inc.; Indiana |
Female with injury to the lower back, bilateral hips and pelvis and right wrist resulting in restricted work environment | |
| Hunt v. Cam-Jo;
Florida |
Female with high school diploma with neck, back, and shoulder injuries |
Articles by other authors
|
| Jones (Leonard) v. Randles; Texas | Death case of a married male with a high school equivalency diploma |
Reliability of methodology Use of methodology outside VEI/litigation Relevance (fit) of opinion
|
| Kelly v. McFarland; Kentucky | Female with two years of college with head and facial injuries |
Medical support Pre- and post-injury earning capacity |
| Knee v. G.B. Supply; Nevada | Female, high school graduate with back, head, and left shoulder injuries |
Phillips v. Industrial Machine
|
|
K v. Woodford; Texas |
Male, college graduate with neck, head, arm, and pelvis injuries |
Fit of opinion
|
| Langer v. Anderson; Minnesota | Male, high school graduate with neck, head, and upper back injuries |
Speculative nature of analysis
|
| Lyons v. Follweiler; Pennsylvania | Female attorney with head, neck, and right shoulder injuries |
Medical support
|
|
Maicki v. Johnson;
Indiana |
Male, high school graduate with low back injury |
|
|
Marcum v. Northern Indiana; Indiana |
Male, high school graduate with shoulder and foot injuries |
Pre-injury earning capacity
|
| McCoy v. Huyear; Kentucky | Male, high school graduate with low back injury |
Relevance to Mr. McCoy |
| McGonigal v. Lucas; Indiana | Female high school graduate with neck and knee injuries |
Validity of the first disability question Life, Participation, Employment methodology Assessment of Ms. McGonigal |
|
Mesman v. Crane; Illinois |
Male with two years of college with knee injuries and subsequent below-the-knee amputation of the left leg |
Validity of the first disability question |
|
Middleton v.
Sears; Texas |
Female, college graduate with right leg and left ankle injuries | |
|
Montgomery v. Mitsubishi Motors; Pennsylvania |
Male, college student who died in a rollover accident | |
| Parsons v. Gabbard; Kentucky | Male with two years of college with back, neck, and left leg injuries | |
|
Presley v. CCS; Kentucky |
Death case of male high school graduate |
Relevance to Mr. Presley Second analysis assuming promotion Relevance of fringe benefit calculation Relevance of household services calculation Worklife expectancy calculations |
|
Rogde v. Northeast
IL Railroad; Illinois |
Male, high school graduate with back injury | |
| Saunders v. Webb; Kentucky | Female with one year of college with head and neck injuries | |
| Shaheen v. Advantage; Illinois | Male attorney with head, pelvic, and spinal injuries |
Lifetime effect of work disability Knowledge beyond the ken of the average juror Effort to limit testimony |
| Snider v. Kotheimer; Kentucky | Female with skull fracture sustained at birth with seizure disorder and marked developmental delays | Expert qualifications |
| Stichnoth v. Shafer;
Indiana |
Male college graduate with a sustained injury to the head, neck, and back as the result of a diving accident. |
Reliability of Methodology Current Population Survey and American Community Survey Medical versus Vocational Testimony Fit of the data with the facts of the case Jackson vs. Roadway Express, Inc. Use of computer software |
| Swiech v. Gottlieb;
Illinois |
Female with some college education with a variety of exertional and nonexertional limitations |
Puleo v. McGladrey & Pullen |
| Taylor v. Tomato Products; Indiana | Male with ten years of education with a knee injury |
Medical support |
| Walker v. Saligumba; California | Female college graduate with injuries to head, back, neck, and right hand, wrist, and shoulder |
Medical support for opinion Support for worklife diminution |
| Williams et al. v. New York | Four children sustained lead paint poisoning. All were diagnosed with cognitive disorder and Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder. Full scale IQs were 84 or lower. | |
| Woods v. Elgin Railroad; Illinois | Male with 10 years of education with cervical spine and rotator cuff injuries |
Pre-injury earnings speculative |
|
Wright v. Jenkins;
Indiana |
Male with two years of college with right foot injuries | |
| Wright v. Werner; Kentucky | Male with associates degree and pursuing bachelor's with back, neck, and head injuries |
Reliability of methodology "Employment, Earnings, and Disability" Use of case-specific data |
Last modified: Monday October 27, 2008 06:22 PM
