In January of 2014, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky decided a case that involved a Lexington Underinsured Motorist (“UIM”) Car Accident. (See Von Wiegen v. Shelter Mutual Ins. Co., 2014 WL 66516 (E.D. Ky 2013)). This car accident case involved a rear-end car accident that occurred on July 9, 2010. The injured car accident driver settled his case with the wrongful party and then filed a claim with his underinsured motorist policy (UIM). The plaintiff’s Lexington Underinsured Motorist (“UIM”) Car Accident attorney filed the UIM car accident lawsuit and bad faith lawsuit.
The lawsuit had forensic accountants testifying as to the financial information pertaining to the injured plaintiff. During discovery the experts were given certain documents to review, but unfortunately were not given all the documents to review. It was mostly tax documents that was reviewed. Tax documents and income statements.
Pursuant to federal rules, the defendant’s attorney filed its Rule 26 Expert Disclosure document. The plaintiff filed two motion to exclude the expert claiming that it did not meet with the Rule 26.
It was noted that the trial court “has the discretion and power to exclude testimony or issue another sanction if a party has failed to comply with the disclosure requirements of Rule 26(a)(2)(B). “ (cites omitted). In this Lexington Underinsured Motorist (“UIM”) Car Accident the defendant disclosed the witness in time and the plaintiff had ample time to depose him.
The defendant’s expert witness is a certified public accountant who is certified in financial forensics and accredited in business valuation by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. Id. The plaintiff’s Lexington Underinsured Motorist (“UIM”) Car Accident attorney tried to argue that he should be excluded from the hearing, but the trial court denied that request and allowed him to testify. This appellate court has upheld the lower court’s ruling.
The court found that the testimony the expert would give would assist it in determining the alleged lost profits and that the expert did have enough information from which to do so. Accordingly, the plaintiff’s motion was denied. The issue as to whether his testimony was valid is an issue as to the weight of the evidence rather than on its admissibility. Id.
If you have been the subject of a Lexington Underinsured Motorist (“UIM”) Car Accident case, please call and speak to a Lexington Underinsured Motorist (“UIM”) Car Accident attorney at the Law Offices of Andrew Alitowski, P.A. at 888-ASK-ANDREW (888-275-2637) or contact us. We are available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.
If you are injured…Ask Andrew!!!