Walters et al v. Flint et al, No. 5:2017cv10164 - Document 638 (E.D. Mich. 2022)
Court Description: OPINION AND ORDER granting in part and denying in part 504 Motion in Limine. Signed by District Judge Judith E. Levy. (WBar)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Dockets.Justia.com In re Flint Water Cases Judith E. Levy United States District Judge __________________________________/ This Order Relates To: Bellwether I Cases Case No. 17-10164 __________________________________/ Walters et al v. Flint et al Before the Court is one of thirteen motions in limine Doc. 638filed by Veolia North America, LLC, Veolia North America, Inc., and Veolia Water North America Operating Services, LLC’s (collectively “VNA”) in anticipation of the first Flint Water bellwether trial. VNA seeks the exclusion of bone lead “reference values” which were included in drafts of Dr. Aaron Specht’s expert reports. The reference values to which VNA objects were drawn from studies involving the exposure of adults to leaded gasoline. (ECF No. 431, PageID.32904-32907.) Dr. Specht explained in his deposition that he did not include them in the final versions of his report because they were not sufficiently relevant to children to be a valuable comparator. (Id. at PageID.32904.) Several other expert witnesses initially relied on the reference values provided in Dr. Specht’s draft reports. (See, e.g., ECF No. 330-34, PageID.15510 (Dr. Bithoney referencing Dr. Specht’s reference values)). Because Dr. Specht has disclaimed reliance on these reference values, Plaintiffs’ other experts may not rely on them in their testimony. Nor may Plaintiffs rely on them during argument at trial to establish that they were subjected to a “persistent” exposure. There is no reason to pre-emptively bar Dr. Specht himself from referencing studies involving the exposure of adults to leaded gasoline, however. To the extent such studies become relevant to (otherwise 2 proper) questions posed to him at trial, Dr. Specht may refer to them. It is clear that Dr. Specht will not use these studies as reference values to evaluate the lead exposure of the bellwether Plaintiffs. (ECF No. 431, PageID.32904.) Because there is no indication that the studies at issue are unreliable, an order barring Dr. Specht from using them in response to relevant questions at trial is unnecessary. Accordingly, VNA’s motion to exclude evidence regarding Dr. Specht’s reference values is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. IT IS SO ORDERED, Dated: January 13, 2022 Ann Arbor, Michigan s/Judith E. Levy JUDITH E. LEVY United States District Judge The undersigned certifies that the foregoing document was served upon counsel of record and any unrepresented parties via the Court’s ECF System to their respective email or first-class U.S. mail addresses disclosed on the Notice of Electronic Filing on January 13, 2022. s/William Barkholz WILLIAM BARKHOLZ Case Manager 3
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
