A magistrate of the Northern District of Texas granted in part an insurer's motion to exclude expert testimony, holding that the insurer's motion may be granted as to a single alleged hail strike on a single window where the expert admitted he had been incorrect during deposition, but denying the motion as to the remainder of the expert's assessment of hail damage where the insurer's objections go to the weight of the testimony and not the reliability or relevance.
Reviewing the Case Document is for members only. Please login