© D.L. Crumbley
Miscellaneous Decisions (Cont.)
Admissibility reversed. Courts have permitted owners and officers of businesses to offer lay opinion on damages, based on their familiarity with enterprise. But plaintiff’s witness was neither owner nor officer, and his testimony therefore should have been evaluated for admissibility as expert opinion under Fed. R. Evid 702. Remanded for new trail on damages.
JGR. Inc. v. Thomasville Furniture Indus., Inc., 370 F.3d 519 (6th Cir. 2004).
Admissibility affirmed. Defendants complain that experts incorrectly accounted for effects of theater size and stadium-style seating on revenues, and also that Greenwald had no specific experience with movie theaters. But Greenwald is CPA who has testified in fifty court cases, and defendants’ other arguments amount to methodological quibbles, which were fully explored before jury. No abuse of discretion.
Regal Cinema, Inc. v. W & M Properties, No. 02-3450 (6th Cir. Jan. 27, 2004) (unpublished).
Admissibility reversed. It is true that lay opinion on lost profits is sometimes permitted, when offered by present or former officers or employees. But despite her experience and advanced degree, this witness was neither of those things, nor was she otherwise