Dennis Moore v. Cottrell, Inc.
334 Ga. App. 791
| Ga. Ct. App. | 2015Background
- Dennis Moore fell from the head ramp (upper deck) of a Cottrell-manufactured car hauler while unloading vehicles in the rain, suffering serious injury; the head ramp lacked fixed ladders, guardrails, or handholds, and used a portable, unsecured ladder.
- The Moores sued Cottrell for strict liability, negligence, and breach of warranty alleging a defective design, inadequate warnings, and lack of safe egress (no safe ladder/handholds/guardrails).
- The trial court’s scheduling order required expert disclosure by Dec. 1, 2011; the Moores disclosed Dr. Harvey Cohen (who never inspected the actual hauler) and later tried to submit John S. Morse’s affidavit on May 16, 2014 (four days before the summary-judgment hearing).
- The trial court excluded Dr. Cohen under Daubert principles for failing to apply reliable methods, and struck Dr. Morse as untimely under the court’s scheduling order.
- The trial court granted summary judgment to Cottrell because, under governing Mississippi substantive law, the Moores lacked expert proof that the product was defectively designed, unreasonably dangerous, and that a feasible alternative existed that would have prevented the harm.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of Dr. Cohen’s expert testimony | Cohen is qualified in human factors/safety and may opine even without inspecting this particular hauler | Cohen’s opinions lack reliable methods, no inspection, no causation opinion — inadmissible under Daubert/OCGA §24-7-702(b) | Trial court did not abuse discretion in excluding Cohen for lack of reliable application to the facts |
| Timeliness of Dr. Morse’s affidavit | Morse supplied relevant expert analysis opposing summary judgment | Morse was disclosed four days before hearing in violation of explicit scheduling order | Trial court did not abuse discretion in striking Morse as untimely |
| Design-defect causation under Mississippi law | Moores contend design (lack of ladder/handholds/guards) made hauler unreasonably dangerous and a feasible alternative existed | Cottrell: plaintiffs lack expert proof of defect, causation, or feasible alternative | Under Mississippi law, expert proof is required to show design defect and feasible alternative; summary judgment for Cottrell affirmed |
| Failure-to-warn claim | Moores argue warnings/manual lacked adequate ladder placement/usage instructions | Cottrell: plaintiff cannot show proximate causation from unread/uncertain warnings and alleged warnings would concern features not present at time of accident | Summary judgment affirmed: plaintiff cannot prove proximate cause from manual/warnings given the record |
Key Cases Cited
- Daubert v. Merrill Dow Pharm., 509 U.S. 579 (1993) (trial court gatekeeper role for expert admissibility)
- Kumho Tire Co. v. Carmichael, 526 U.S. 137 (1999) (Daubert principles apply to non-scientific expert testimony)
- Dubois v. Brantley, 297 Ga. 575 (2015) (discussing OCGA §24-7-702 and expert admissibility standards)
- HNTB Ga., Inc. v. Hamilton-King, 287 Ga. 641 (2010) (expert qualification and reliance on hearsay/data of a type reasonably relied upon)
- Palmer v. Volkswagen of Am., Inc., 904 So. 2d 1077 (Miss. 2005) (Mississippi law on proof required in products-liability cases regarding causation and defect)