Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Maine Windjammers, Inc. v. Sea3, LLC

United States District Court, D. Maine

November 8, 2019

MAINE WINDJAMMERS, INC., Plaintiff
v.
SEA3, LLC, et al., Defendants

          MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER ON PLAINTIFF'S MOTION IN LIMINE TO EXCLUDE TRIAL TESTIMONY OF ROBERT LARSEN, IN PART

          JOHN H. RICH III UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE.

         In this maritime breach of contract action, the plaintiff, Maine Windjammers (“Windjammers”), has filed a motion in limine to bar defendant/counterclaim plaintiff Robert Larsen, the owner of defendant/counterclaim plaintiff Sea3, LLC (“Sea3”), from testifying regarding work that Sea3 performed on the S/V Halie & Matthew (the “Vessel”), including repair costs, project estimates, labor hours, and value added to the Vessel. See Plaintiff's Motion in Limine To Exclude Trial Testimony of Robert Larsen, in Part (“Motion”) (ECF No. 53). Because (i) Sea3 has presented a sufficient foundation for Mr. Larsen's testimony regarding repair costs, project estimates, and labor hours, and (ii) Windjammers has not cited any specific instance in which Mr. Larsen offered an opinion regarding the value added to the Vessel, I deny the Motion.

         I. Applicable Legal Standard

         Federal Rule of Evidence 702 provides:

A witness who is qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education may testify in the form of an opinion or otherwise if:
(a) the expert's scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will help the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue;
(b) the testimony is based on sufficient facts or data;
(c) the testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods; and
(d) the expert has reliably applied the principles and methods to the facts of the case.

Fed. R. Evid. 702.

         By contrast, “‘[i]n its purest form, lay testimony is based on the witness' observations of the event or situation in question and amounts to little more than a shorthand rendition of facts that the witness personally observed.'” Portland Pipe Line Corp. v. City of South Portland, 288 F.Supp.3d 321, 335 n.10 (D. Me. 2017) (quoting Weinstein's Federal Evidence § 701.03 (2001)). Nonetheless, a lay witness may also offer opinion testimony if his or her opinion is:

(a) rationally based on the witness's perception;
(b) helpful to clearly understanding the witness's testimony or to determining a fact in issue; and
(c) not based on scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge within the ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.