Court Rulings on Some Key Motions in Rossi vs. Darden

The following post has been submitted by Dr. Mike

Court Rulings on Some Key Motions in Rossi vs. Darden

Some important court rulings for several motions in the Rossi vs. Darden court case have been posted on Google Drive:

In Document #303 the court has ruled on the admissibility of expert witnesses.  In summary the court has ruled that both the Smith Report and the Smith Supplemental Report are admissible, and Smith is qualified to give his opinions in support of the Defendants.  However, the court ruled that they will not make a decision on Murray’s testimony until he produces a formal report, which must be filed by 5/31/2017.  (The court’s ruling on Smith’s reports should help Murray write a report that is acceptable to the court.)

The court rulings were not as favorable for the Plaintiff’s expert witness, Wong.  Wong’s first opinion that the “coefficient of performance is a suitable criterion to gauge E-Cat performance” will not be admissible.  Also, Wong’s second opinion that “there are logical explanations for the inverse relationship between the input power into a device and its coefficient of performance” will not be allowed.  (Therefore, the Plaintiffs will have no expert testimony on this subject to counter Smith’s testimony.)  However, the court will permit Wong’s expert testimony that assuming there was a heat exchanger in the Doral facility; there would not have been an unsafe working environment due to too much heat.  While this testimony will certainly be helpful to the plaintiff’s case, it can be anticipated that Wong will also have to testify during cross examination that the facility would be too hot if there were no heat exchanger (based on the questions asked at the deposition).  In my opinion this will make Wong a poor expert witness for the Plaintiffs since he will also be testifying that he never observed any evidence that a heat exchanger existed.

Court rulings in Document #302 are also interesting in that the court has denied motions by the Plaintiffs, the Defendants, and the Third Party Defendants for summary judgments and partial summary judgments.  All issues discussed in the motions will be heard by the jury, and the jury will decide whose arguments prevail on these issues.

My recommendation is that anyone really interested in this case read the actual court rulings and then form their own opinions as to how they think these rulings will affect the case during the trail.

Dr. Mike