226 So. 3d 1200
La. Ct. App.2017Background
- Dr. Paul O. Schwarzenberger, a tenured LSU investigator, ran clinical trials for pharmaceutical sponsors (GlaxoSmithKline, NovaRx, Ligand) while employed by LSU; sponsors paid funds to LSU per the trial agreements.
- In 2004 Schwarzenberger went to part‑time, formed CORA to continue trials, and requested transfers of residual trial funds to CORA; LSU directed transfer of patients and closure of inactive trials.
- Plaintiffs sued LSU (writs, declaratory relief, damages; claims for breach of contract and related relief) alleging LSU willfully failed to transfer funds and deprived Schwarzenberger/CORA of compensation.
- LSU moved for summary judgment on contract claims, moved separately on Ligand claims as moot, and moved on GlaxoSmithKline‑related claims; the trial court excluded plaintiffs’ CPA expert (Holly Sharp) under Daubert‑style analysis.
- The trial court granted LSU’s motions, finding plaintiffs could not prove damages after exclusion of the expert and that Ligand claims were moot because residual funds were paid; appeals followed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of CPA expert (Daubert gatekeeping) | Sharp’s opinions were reliable and necessary to prove damages; exclusion was improper | Sharp’s report lacked methodology, scientific basis and was effectively ghost‑written; exclusion was within trial court discretion | Trial court did not abuse discretion; Sharp stricken for failing Daubert/Foret factors and report deficiencies |
| Proof of contract damages | Schwarzenberger can show uncompensated services/losses and LSU’s audits/deductions support damages; expert would quantify losses | Plaintiff offered no corroborated calculation; self‑serving testimony insufficient; LSU audits stand uncontradicted | No genuine issue of material fact on damages; summary judgment proper because plaintiff failed to substantiate damages |
| Mootness of Ligand claims | Plaintiff should be allowed to challenge LSU audits and recovery of residual Ligand funds | Residual Ligand funds were paid by LSU and no practical relief remains; claim is moot | Ligand claims moot; summary judgment for LSU granted |
| Whether credibility weighing improperly occurred at summary judgment | Plaintiff contends trial court improperly weighed credibility of his testimony | LSU contends plaintiff’s testimony is uncorroborated and insufficient to create an issue of fact | Appellate court found no improper credibility weighing; record shows court addressed materiality not credibility |
Key Cases Cited
- Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharm., 509 U.S. 579 (1993) (trial judge’s gatekeeping factors for admissibility of expert scientific testimony)
- Gen. Elec. Co. v. Joiner, 522 U.S. 136 (1997) (abuse‑of‑discretion review of expert admissibility)
- Foret v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co., 628 So.2d 1116 (La. 1993) (applying Daubert and factors for admissibility under Louisiana law)
- Jordan v. Travelers Ins. Co., 245 So.2d 151 (La. 1971) (standard for proving lost profits in contract actions)