Chinese Drywall & MoldMay 21, 2009
Personal Injury LogJanuary 14, 2010
Attorney Brad Kelsky was able to overcome a legal challenge to the admissibility of Dr. Ritchie Shoemaker’s opinion on mold-related personal injury claims thereby allowing the doctor to testify at trial. As seen elsewhere in this blog, mold-related personal injury claims are very difficult to prove. In any case where these types of personal injury claims are claimed, the defense usually challenges the propriety of the plaintiff’s expert’s medical opinion. In Florida, this is called a Frye challenge. Under Frye, the plaintiff must prove that the expert’s methodology is generally accepted by the scientific community. In a recent case in Collier County, Florida, two of the defendants challenged Dr. Shoemaker’s opinions and each brought their own expert witness to testify at the Frye hearing. Brad E. Kelsky Esq., counsel for the plaintiffs, was able to establish that Ritchie Shoemaker, M.D.’s methodology in reaching his opinion was generally accepted by the scientific community. For this reason, the court ruled against both defendants and ruled that Dr. Shoemaker will be able to offer his medical opinions about the plaintiffs’ personal injuries and how those injuries were related to exposure to a water damaged building. This is a very significant victory for the case in Collier County and for those cases in other states where Dr. Shoemaker’s methodology has been challenged.
This article does not constitute legal advice or the formation of an attorney-client relationship, and is not for re-publication without express permission of the author.