Bailey Lumber & Supply Co. v. Robinson
98 So. 3d 986
Miss.2012Background
- Robinson sued Bailey Lumber for injuries from a fall on Bailey Lumber’s premises in September 2006.
- Robinson tripped on a two-inch step at the doorway between a dim paint-mixing room and a well-lit computer room; lighting conditions disputed.
- Robinson alleged Bailey Lumber failed to warn about the hazardous condition; he reported immediate hip pain and later underwent hip-replacement surgery.
- A jury awarded Robinson $1,500,000, which the trial court reduced to $1,070,341.42 for economic and noneconomic damages under §11-1-60.
- The trial court admitted Dr. Obie McNair’s testimony on causation and future medical expenses; on appeal Bailey Lumber challenges qualification, reliability, and pretrial disclosure issues and the case is remanded for a new trial.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Dr. McNair was qualified to testify on causation. | Robinson argues McNair’s internal-medicine expertise suffices for causation. | Bailey Lumber contends McNair lacked specialty in orthopedics to causally relate the fall to hip replacement. | Yes, McNair was not qualified for causation testimony. |
| Whether McNair’s causation testimony was reliable under Rule 702/Daubert. | McNair’s experience supports reliability in diagnosing hip problems. | Testimony rested on speculation without scientific methodology. | Testimony unreliable and improperly admitted. |
| Whether the trial court erred in allowing future medical expenses testimony without proper pretrial disclosure. | Disclosures satisfied under Rule 26(b)(4)(A)(i). | Bailey Lumber was not given the substance of McNair’s opinions beforehand. | Error to admit future medical expenses testimony without proper disclosure. |
| Whether the error merits remittitur or reversal without prejudice to a new trial. | Court reverses and remands for a new trial. |
Key Cases Cited
- McLemore v. Mississippi Transportation Commission, 863 So.2d 31 (Miss. 2003) (Daubert reliability factors applied to expert testimony)
- Troupe v. McAuley, 955 So.2d 848 (Miss. 2007) (outside-area expertise may preclude qualification under Rule 702)
- Cheeks v. Bio-Med. Applications, Inc., 908 So.2d 117 (Miss. 2005) (family physician may testify only with familiar standard of care)
- Worthy v. McNair, 37 So.3d 609 (Miss. 2010) (reliability concerns when expert testifies outside discipline)
- Jones v. Hatchett, 504 So.2d 198 (Miss. 1987) (discovery and expert disclosure requirements; pretrial particulars)
- Square D Co. v. Edwards, 419 So.2d 1327 (Miss. 1982) (pretrial disclosure of expert testimony subject to supplementation)
- Nichols v. Tubb, 609 So.2d 377 (Miss. 1992) (Rule 26(b)(4) disclosures must include substance and grounds)