COVEL v. Rodriguez, 2012 OK 5

Wrongful death action alleging defective bus brakes caused Covel's death in a head-on collision with a Rodriguez bus on I-35.
Plaintiffs offered Dr. Strauss as an expert in accident reconstruction; defendants did not object to his testimony at trial.
Jury awarded $2.8 million to plaintiffs and $5,000 in punitive damages; trial court denied JNOV, remittitur, and new trial.
Court of Civil Appeals reversed, finding Strauss’s causation opinions ipse dixit and not grounded in Daubert methodology.
Oklahoma Supreme Court granted certiorari to address admissibility standards and the proper treatment of Daubert challenges in this context.
Court unanimously affirms denial of JNOV/new trial/remittitur, holding there was competent evidence supporting the verdict and no fundamental error.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Waiver of Daubert challenges due to no objection	Strauss testimony admissible; defendant failed to object, waiving Daubert grounds.	Daubert challenge timely despite lack of in-trial objections; method lacking foundation.	Waived; no fundamental error; Daubert gatekeeping not preserved
Applicability of Daubert/Kumho to Oklahoma expert testimony	Federal standards apply to admissibility of expert testimony in Oklahoma.	Daubert/Kumho gatekeeping governs reliability of expert methods.	Daubert applies; trial court may gatekeep when challenged
Sufficiency of causation evidence	Defective brakes caused greater injury/death; causal link supported by Strauss.	No reliable basis; accident due to sudden, unavoidable event; brakes not causal.	Competent evidence supports jury’s causation finding
Jury instructions on negligence per se and causation	Instructions properly stated causation and negligence standards; no misstatement.	Supplemental causation instruction requested; negligence per se instructions improper or unnecessary.	No reversible error; instructions adequate and correctly applied
Pretrial/bifurcation and prejudicial conduct arguments	Trial court allowed proper presentation; bifurcation appropriately addressed damages.	Court constrained defense; prejudicial comments and celebrity status affected the verdict.	No reversible prejudice; conduct not shown to render verdict unreliable

Christian v. Gray, 65 P.3d 591 (Okla. 2003) (Daubert in Oklahoma for admissibility of expert testimony)
Macsenti v. Becker, 237 F.3d 1223 (10th Cir. 2001) (failure to object to Daubert challenge; plain error review)
Marbled Murrelet v. Babbitt, 83 F.3d 1060 (9th Cir. 1996) (Daubert/insufficiency challenge avoided by lack of objection)
State v. Planters Gin Co., 175 Okla. 386 (Okla. 1935) (admission of evidence without objection; probative impact)
D & H Co., Inc. v. Shultz, 579 P.2d 821 (Okla. 1978) (admitting testimony without objection; effect on ruling)
Pacific Nat. Fire Ins. Co. v. Woods, 381 P.2d 824 (Okla. 1963) (opinion evidence admissible without objection and considered on demurrer)