EXPERT TESTIMONY PROPERLY ALLOWED AS WITHIN COURT'S DISCRETION.
GEORGE DIEFENBACH, Plaintiff, Appellee, v. SHERIDAN TRANSPORTATION, Defendant, Appellant. SIX TUG BARGE CORPORATION, Defendant,Appellee.
No. 00-1099
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
229 F.3d 27; 2000 U.S. App. LEXIS 25225
October 6, 2000, Decided
OVERVIEW: Plaintiff employee brought an action against defendant employer pursuant to the Jones Act, 46 U.S.C.S. app. ยง 688 (1994), for personal injuries sustained in the course of his employment. The first trial ended in a mistrial. The second trial resulted in a jury verdict and an award of damages for plaintiff. Defendant moved for a new trial on the grounds that the district court improperly instructed the jury, improperly admitted plaintiff's maritime expert's opinion and allowed an excessive verdict, and defendant also moved for remittitur. The district court denied the defendant's motions for a new trial and remittitur. Defendant appealed, claiming district court error in denying its motions. The court affirmed, holding that the district court did not err in denying defendant's motions because the district court properly admitted plaintiff's maritime expert's opinion and defendant waived any objection to its admission, the district court properly instructed the jury regarding damages, and th e jury's damage award did not warrant remittitur as it was supported by the evidence.
OUTCOME: Judgment affirmed because the district court properly admitted plaintiff employee's maritime expert's opinion and defendant employer waived any objection to its admission, the district court properly instructed the jury regarding damages, and the jury's damage award was supported by the evidence.
