Daubert Watch 5.39.3008: Economist passes the muster

In Mcdaniel vs. Gallery Model Homes, Inc. age discrimination case, in the Southern District of Texas, JOHN D. RAINEY, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE ruled that the defendant's concerns went to the weight NOT the admissibility of the economist's testimony.

The motion by the defense attorney is particular interesting. It is clear that there was a lot of bad blood betwen these two parties.

In the motion the defense complained of :

- The economic damage report (on back and front pay) not meeting rule 26(b) standards. (According to the motion the plaintiff's economist did not provide all the required documents )

- Plaintiff economist not having enough data to perform and adequate analysis

- The unknown rate of error of his worklife estimates

- Use of benefits multiplier and the fact that the ezpert did not know the exact benefits that the defendant provided

- Growth rate did not match the plaintiffs job. Economist used aggregate data not specific to sales

- Health of the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs had knee surgery that may have prevented them from performing some types of work. The economist did not include this in his analysis.


(see: dauberttracker.com for details)

Defense's Motion to Exclude : 58-1.pdf