Free Motion to Preclude - District Court of Connecticut - Connecticut


File Size: 38.6 kB
Pages: 3
Date: August 30, 2004
File Format: PDF
State: Connecticut
Category: District Court of Connecticut
Author: unknown
Word Count: 409 Words, 2,558 Characters
Page Size: Letter (8 1/2" x 11")
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/ctd/22945/16-1.pdf

Download Motion to Preclude - District Court of Connecticut ( 38.6 kB)


Preview Motion to Preclude - District Court of Connecticut
Case 3:03-cv-01015-DJS

Document 16

Filed 08/30/2004

Page 1 of 3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT

GLEN FALLS INSURANCE COMPANY a/s/o HAROLD and LAUREN HEINZ, : Plaintiff, V. : :

CIVIL CASE NO. 303 CV 1015 (DJS)

COMMAND FORCE SECURITY SYSTEMS, INC. Defendants

:

:

August 30, 2004

MOTION TO PRECLUDE EXPERT'S TESTIMONY

Pursuant to the Local Rules of the United States District Court of Connecticut, the Defendant Command Force Security Systems, Inc., by its attorneys, Kaufman Borgeest & Ryan LLP, hereby moves this Court for an Order, pursuant to FRE 702, 28 U.S.C.A., dismissing a portion of Plaintiff's Expert's testimony, as inadmissible as a matter of law. As more fully set forth in the attached Affidavit of Carol S. Doty, Esq. and Memorandum of Law, Plaintiff's Expert's second report relative to an investigation of the fire scene and alarm system installed by the defendant, and the conclusions contained therein, should be inadmissible as they do not comply with the FRE Rule 702, 28 U.S.C.A. Specifically, plaintiff's expert's second report is completely unreliable for the following reasons: (1) the report is not based on research prepared independently of the litigation herein; (2) the conclusions in the report were not arrived at by use of a reliable

1

Case 3:03-cv-01015-DJS

Document 16

Filed 08/30/2004

Page 2 of 3

*ORAL ARGUMENT IS REQUESTED

methodology; and (3) plaintiff's expert's own testimony disagrees with the findings of his second report, and disagrees with the allegations in the plaintiff's complaints. For the foregoing reasons, the defendant respectfully requests that the Court grant this motion for an Order Precluding the introduction of plaintiff's expert's second report into evidence, and for any such further relief that the Court deems just an necessary. Dated: August 30, 2004 New York, New York Yours, etc., THE DEFENDANT COMMAND FORCE SECURITY SYSTEMS, INC. By:__________________________ Carol S. Doty, Esq. CT24974 KAUFMAN BORGEEST & RYAN LLP 99 Park Avenue ­ 19th Floor New York, New York 10016 212-980-9600 212-980-9291 (Facsimile) [email protected]

2

Case 3:03-cv-01015-DJS

Document 16

Filed 08/30/2004

Page 3 of 3

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing was mailed to the following party of record postage prepaid this 30th day of August, 2004 as follows: Attorney Joseph E. Mascaro Morrison, Mahoney & Miller, LLP One Constitution Plaza, 10th Floor Harford, CT 06103 860-616-4441

__________________________________ Carol S. Doty

3