Morritt v. Stryker Corp.
2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 135861
E.D.N.Y2013Background
- Plaintiffs Debra and Craig Morritt sued Stryker entities for injuries from a knee replacement system in 2007; case removed to E.D.N.Y. in 2007.
- Magistrate Judge Reyes issued a Report & Recommendation (R&R) on August 12, 2013 addressing motions to amend and in limine.
- Plaintiffs sought to amend to add hip injury and wrongful death claims; defendants sought to preclude nonmedical expert testimony by Dr. Montalbano.
- The Court overruled objections, adopted the R&R, and denied the motion to amend while granting the in limine motion.
- The Court recommits the matter to the magistrate for pretrial supervision and settlement discussions.
- The underlying summary judgment ruling in 2011 had denied some claims while allowing others to proceed, and Dr. Montalbano’s declarations were central to those issues.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Dr. Montalbano may testify on manufacturing defects | Montalbano is qualified as Morritt’s treating physician | Lacks qualifications in biotech/manufacturing; methodology inadequate | Dr. Montalbano’s proffered manufacturing/causation testimony excluded |
| Whether the amendment to add hip injury and wrongful death is proper | Amendment timely; hip injury known; death unforeseen | Undue delay; prejudice from reopening discovery | Amendment denied; wrongful death futile; hip injury amendment denied due to lack of good cause and prejudice |
| Whether amendment is futile given existing summary judgment record | Proposed claims would survive with proper evidence | Record shows no triable issue for new claims | Amendment denied as futile |
Key Cases Cited
- Manganiello v. Agostini, No. 07-CV-3644 (HB) (S.D.N.Y. 2008) (treating physicians may testify to causation without expert report; Daubert standard governs admissibility)
- Milanese v. Rust-Oleum Corp., 244 F.3d 104 (2d Cir.2001) (amendment after summary judgment can be denied if no triable issue exists)
- Amorgianos v. Nat’l R.R. Passenger Corp., 303 F.3d 256 (2d Cir.2002) (Daubert factors apply to reliability of expert testimony)
- Ruggiero v. Warner-Lambert Co., 424 F.3d 249 (2d Cir.2005) (rigorous differential diagnosis must be scientifically valid)
- Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, 509 U.S. 579 (1993) (establishes reliability/flexibility standard for expert testimony)
- McCullock v. H.B. Fuller Co., 61 F.3d 1038 (2d Cir.1995) (admissibility of scientific methods; weight of evidence depends on support)