United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
MEMORANDUM RE MOTIONS IN LIMINE
MICHAEL M. BAYLSON, District Judge.
Following extensive briefing and several hearings, the Court has considered and will decide various motions in limine that have been filed in this case and will be discussed in this Memorandum.
A. Motions to Exclude Expert Witnesses (ECF 107, 109 & 114)
Both parties have filed motions to exclude the other party's expert witness, Mary Fuller for Plaintiff, and William Hager for Defendants. As to the contention that each expert witness is not qualified and should not be permitted to testify at all, the Court rejects these contentions and believes that both Fuller and Hager satisfy the Third Circuit's holdings on expert qualifications based on their background and experience with disability insurance claims. Pineda v. Ford Motor Co. , 520 F.3d 237, 246-47 (3d Cir. 2008). Of course, the weight of the experts' opinions is for the jury and not for the Court.
1. Mary Fuller
The Court had a lengthy evidentiary hearing at which Ms. Fuller testified, and had prepared the following list of ten topics as a fair summary of her report, which is verbose, repetitive, and argumentative in many respects:
1. Failed fully investigate Plaintiff's claim for benefits
2. Failed to pay claim while investigated claim for past benefits
3. Delay payment until removal of reservation of rights on 7/13/2012
4. Delayed peer to peer contact
5. Did not advise Plaintiff of his right to demand an IME
6. Delayed IME
7. Dr. Price caused undue delay
8. Quality compliance ...