WHOLE COURT

N O T IC E : M otions for re c ons i de r a tion m us t be phy s ic a lly re ce iv e d in our cle r k’s off i c e w ithin te n da y s of the da te of de c is ion to be de e m ed tim e ly file d.

http://w w w .ga a ppe a l s .us /r ule s

Nov em ber 20, 2015



# I n th e Co u r t o f

A p p eals o f

G eo r g ia

A1 5 A0 80 2 . M O ORE et al . v . COTTRELL, INC. DO-0 5 6

D O Y LE , Ch ief J ud g e.

Den n i s an d Li s a M o o re fi l ed t h i s act i o n t o reco v er fo r i n ju ri es Den n i s recei v ed

i n a fal l fro m t he t op lev el o f a car h au l er m an u fact u red by Co tt rel l

, In c. Th e M o o res

ap p eal t he tri al co u rt ’ s o rd ers s t ri k i n g t h ei r ex p ert s an d g ran ti n g s u m m ary ju d g m en t

t o Co t trel l . W e affi rm

fo r t h e reas o n s t h at fo l l o w.

On Ap ri l 1

, 2 0 0 8

, Den n i s , a car h au l er d ri ver fo r W ag g o ners Tru ck i n g

Co m p an y , w en t t o th e Ni s s an No rt h Am eri can faci l i t y i n Can t o n, M i s si s si p p i

, t o p i ck

u p a l oad o f n ew v eh i cl es

. Th e car h au ler was eq ui p p ed wi t h a “ h ead ram p ,” wh i ch

h el d t h ree v eh icl es o v er t h e t ru ck cab

, an d w as at t ach ed t o a t wo -l ev el t rai l er. Th e car

h au ler i ncl u d ed a p o rt ab l e, no n -affi xed l ad d e r , w hi ch co u l d b e m o ved fro m t h e

d ri v er’ s si d e to t h e p as s en g e r ’s s i d e o f t he car h au l er an d was lo cat ed at t h e rear o ft h e h ead ram p

. It was rai ni n g , an d t h e car h au l er wa s w e t

. Den n i s b ack ed t h e fi rs t

v eh icl e o n t o t h e h ead ram p o f th e ca r h au l er (i nt o t h e p o s i t i o n fart h es t fo rward an d

o v er t h e cab an d h o o d o f h i s t ract o r-t rai l er ri g ), ex it ed t h e v eh i cl e o n t h e p as s en g er

s i de o f t h e car hau l er, wal k ed p as t t h e fi rs t v eh i cl e, an d wal k ed d o wn t h e ram p s t o t h e

g ro u nd i n l ieu o f u s i n g t h e l ad d er. He t h en d ro v e a Ni s s an Arm ad a (a l arg e SUV) i n to

t h e seco n d p o s i t i o n o n t h e h ead ram p , ex i t ed fro m t h e d ri v er’ s d o or o n th e d r i v e r ’s

s i de o f t h e car h au ler, an d t u rn ed t o face t h e SUV, in t en d i n g t o s t e p o nt o t h e wi d er

ram p at t he b ack o f t h e SUV u p o n wh i ch th e t i res are d ri v en an d wal k d o w n t h e ram p

t o th e g ro u n d

. W h i l e b al an ce d o n t h e f r am e o f t he h ead ram

p , w hi ch was n ot

eq u ip p ed wi th g u ard rai l s o r h an d h o l d s , Den n i s at t em pt ed t o m ai nt ai n a t h ree-p o i nt

s t an ce b y g ras pi ng t h e ro o f of t h e Arm ad a wi t h h i s fi n gers as h e in ch ed al o n g t h e rai l

o f t h e h ead ram

p to ward s t h e b ack o f t h e SUV. A s h e ap p ro ach ed t h e rear t i re o f t h e

Arm ad a, Den n i s l os t h i s fo o t i n g an d fel l t o t h e g ro un d , s u s t ai n in g s eri o u s i n ju ri es

.

In a s u b seq uen t affi d av i t

, Den n is ex p lai n ed t h at t h e car h au l er d i d no t co n t ai n

a l ad d er b u i l t in t h e fram e o f t h e h e a d r a m p

. In s t ead

, it h ad a p o rt ab l e, al u m i n u m

l ad d er, wh i ch d i d n o t h av e a m ech an i s m fo r secu ri n g t h e t o p o f i t

, an d b ecau s e i t d id

n o t hav e r u b b er co at ed b o t t o m s o r “ fl i p p ers ,” i t “ co ul d o nl y b e u s ed safel y i f t h e

b o t t o m o f t h e l ad d er was res t i n g o n d i rt an d co u l d b e p u s h ed i n t o t h e g ro u n d far

2en o ug h to h o l d i t i n p l ace.” 1 Den n i s d i d n o t at t em p t t o cl i m b d own t h e p o rt ab l e l ad d er

b e cau s e at t h e t i m e o f hi s fal l

, t h e car h au l er was l o cat ed o n an as p h al t p ark i n g l o t

.

As a res u l t

, h e b el i ev ed h e h a d n o o t h e r o p t i o n t han t o t ry to m an eu v er aro u n d t h e

Arm ad a t o reach t h e ram

p

.

Den n i s an d h i s w i fe, Li s a, s u ed Co t t rel l

, as s ert i n g cl ai m s fo r s t r i c t l i a b i l i t y ,

n eg li g en ce, an d breach o f warran t y

. Th e M o ores al l eg ed t h at t h e Co t trel l car h au l er

(s p eci fi cal ly

, t h e h ead ram p ) was d efect i ve an d n o t eq ui p p e d wi t h a s afe m ean s fo r

h i m t o d es cen d t o t h e gro un d

, s p eci fi cal l y ch al l en g i n g t he l ack o f a reas on ab l y s afe

l ad d er, a g u ard rai l o r ot h er s i m i l ar s afet y s y s t em , o r h an d h o l d s. On Au g u st 1 8

, 2 0 1 1,

t h e t ri al co u rt en t ered a c o n sen t cas e m an ag em en t o rd er, p ro vi d i ng th at d i s co v ery

wo u l d en d o n Ap ri l 1

, 2 0 1 2

, req u i r i n g t h e M o o res t o d i s cl o s e th ei r ex p ert s n o l at er

t h an Decem

b er 1 , 2 0 1 1, an d m ak e t h e ex p ert s av ai l ab l e fo r dep o s i t i o n n o l at er t h an

J an u ary 1

, 2 0 1 2

, an d req u i r i n g t h e p a rt i es to fi l e d i s p o s i t i v e m o t i on s no l at er t h an

M ay 1 , 2 0 1 2

.

1 Aft er Den n i s ’ s acci d en t

, Co t trel l beg an u s i n g a s y s t em t hat i n cl u des h o o k s at

t h e t o p o f t h e p o rt ab l e l ad d ers t h at fi t i n t o s l o t s i n t h e u p p er d eck o f t he h ead ram p, fi rm l y s ecu ri n g t h e l ad d er.

3On M ay 8

, 2 0 1 2, Co t t rel l fi led a m o t i o n t o ex cl u d e t h e t es t i m o n y o f t h e

M o o res ’ s ex p e r t

, Dr. Harv ey Co h en , u n d er Da u b er t

. 2 On Decem ber 2 0, 2 0 1 3,

fo l l o w i n g a h eari n g , t h e t r i a l co u rt g ran t ed Co t t rel l’ s m o t io n an d ex cl u d ed Dr.

C o h e n ’s t es t i m o n y , fi n d i n g t h at al t h o u g h h e was qu al i fi ed to tes t ify as i n ex p er t i n

“ s afet y i s s u es rel at in g t o fal l s ,” h e fai l ed t o ap p l y “ rel iab l e p ri nci p l es or m et h o d s t o

t h i s cas e.” On J an u ary 8

, 2 0 1 4

, Co t t rel l m o v ed fo r s u m m ary ju d g m en t

, an d t h e t ri al

co u rt s ch ed u l ed a h e a r i n g o n t h e m o t i o n fo r M ay 20

, 2 0 1 4. On M ay 1 6, 2 0 1 4

, in

o p p o s i t i o n t o t h e s u m

m ary ju d g m en t m o t i o n , t h e M o ores fi led t h e affi d av i t o f an o t h er

ex p ert

, J o h n S. M ors e, Ph .D., P.E. Fo l l o wi ng t h e h eari n g, wh i ch was n o t t ran s cri b ed

,

t h e t ri al co u rt en tered an ord er s t ri k i n g Dr. M o rs e’ s affi d av i t as u n ti m el y an d g ran t i n g

s u m m ary ju d g m en t t o Co tt rel l

. 3 Th i s ap p eal fo ll o wed

.

1

. T h e M o o r e s a rg u e t h at t h e t ri al co u rt erred b y s t ri ki ng Dr. Co h en ’ s ex p ert

t es t i m o ny . W e d i s ag ree.

OCGA § 2 4 -7 -7 0 2 (b ) p ro v i d es :

2 Da u b er t v. Mer r i l l Do w Ph ar ma ceu t i ca l s

, In c ., 5 0 9 U. S. 5 7 9 (1 1 3 SCt 2 7 8 6,

1 2 5 LE2 d 4 6 9 ) (1 9 9 3 ).

3 In t h e o r d er, h o wev er, t h e t ri al co u rt n ot ed s u m m ary ju d g m en t wo u l d b e

p ro p er ev en i f i t h ad n o t s tri ck en Dr. M o rs e’ s affi d av it

.

4If s ci en t i fi c, tech n i cal

, o r o t h er s p eci al ized k n owl ed g e w i l l as s is t th e

t ri er o f fact t o u n d ers t an d t h e ev i d en ce o r t o d et erm i n e a fact i n i s s u e, a

wi t n es s q ual i fi ed as an ex p ert b y k n o wl ed ge, s k i l l

, ex p eri en ce, t rai n i n g ,

o r ed u cat i o n m ay t es t i fy t h eret o i n t he fo rm o f an op i n i o n o r ot h erwi s e,

i f : (1 ) Th e t es t i m o n y i s b as ed u p o n s u ffi ci en t fact s o r d at a; (2 ) Th e

t es t i m o n y i s t h e pro d uct o f rel iab l e p ri n ci p les an d m et h o d s ; an d (3 ) T he

wi t n es s h as ap p li ed t h e p ri n ci p l es an d m et h o d s rel i ab l y t o t he fact s o f

t h e cas e wh i ch h av e b een o r wi l l b e ad m i t t ed i nt o e v i d en ce b efo re th e

t ri er o f fact

.

“ Th i s s tan d ard i s b as ed u p on F e d e r a l R u l e of Ev i d en ce 7 0 2

, an d i t req u i res a t ri al

co u rt t o s i t a s a g at ek eep er an d as s es s t h e rel i ab i l i ty o f p ro po s ed ex p ert t es t i m o n y ,

ap p ly i n g t h e p ri n ci p l es i d en t i fi ed i n Da u b er t an d i ts p ro g en y .” 4 “ Th e d et erm i n at i o n

o f w h e t h e r a wi tn es s is q u al i fi ed t o ren d er an o p in i o n as an ex p ert i s a l eg al

d et erm i n at i o n fo r t h e t ri al co u rt an d wi l l n o t b e d i s t u rb ed ab s en t a m an i fes t ab u s e o f

d i s cret i o n .” 5

“ In d et erm i n i n g t h e ad m i s s i bi l i t y o f ex p ert t es t i m on y , t h e t ri al co urt

. .

. as s es s [es ] b o t h t h e wi tn es s ’ q u al i fi cat io n s t o t es ti fy i n a part icu l ar area

o f ex p ert i se an d t h e rel ev an cy an d rel i ab i l i ty o f t h e p ro ffered t es ti m o ny

.

4 (Ci t at i o n s an d p u n ct uat i o n o m i t t ed .) Du b oi s v. Br a n t ley

, 2 9 7 Ga. 5 7 5

, 5 8 0 (2 ) (7 7 5 SE2 d 5 1 2 ) (2 0 1 5 ).

5 (Pu n ct u at io n o m i t ted .) HNTB Ga ., In c. v. Ha mi l t o n -Ki n g , 28 7 Ga. 64 1

, 6 4 2 (1 ) (6 97 SE2 d 7 70 ) (2 0 1 0 ).

5Rel i ab i li t y i s ex am i ned t hro u g h co n s i de r a tion of m a ny f a c to rs , i n cl u d i n g

wh et h er a th eo ry or t ech ni q u e can be t es t e d

, w h e t h er i t has b een

s u b ject ed t o peer rev i ew an d p u b l i cat io n , t h e k n o wn or p o t en t i al rat e o f

erro r fo r t h e t h eo ry o r t ech n i q u e, t h e g en eral deg ree of accep t an ce in th e

rel ev an t s ci en t i fi c o r p ro fes s i o n al co m m u n i t y , an d t h e ex p ert ’ s ran g e o f

ex p eri en ce an d t rai ni n g

. 6

Ap p ly i n g t hes e p ri n ci p l es t o t hi s cas e, we co n cl ud e t h at t h e t ri al co u rt d i d n ot

ab u se i t s d i s cret i on b y fi n d in g Dr. Co h en ’ s t es t i m o n y i n ad m i s s i b l e. In h i s rep o rt

at t ach ed to h i s d ep o s it i o n , Dr. Co h en o p i n ed t h at t he car h au l er fro m wh i ch Den n i s

fel l was “ d efect i ve an d u nreas o n ab l y dan g ero u s fro m a h u m an s y s t em s s afet y

p ers p ect i v e,” ex p l ai n i ng t h at (1 ) t h e d es i g n of t h e car h au ler d i d n o t in cl u d e a

“ co n t i n uo u s an d s t a b l e [t h ree] -p o i n t s o f co n t act

, . . . g uard rai l s , h an d h o l d s , o r

s u ffi ci en t l y w i d e ca t w a l k s ” ; (2 ) t he car h au l er di d n o t i n cl u d e ad eq u at e warn i n g

l ab el s; an d (3 ) Co t t rel l fai l ed to p ro v i d e ad eq u at e s afet y i n s t ru ct io n s i n t h e o p erat o r’ s

m an u al

. 7 Dr. Co h en ad m i t t ed at h i s d ep o si t i o n , h o wev er, th at h e n ev er i n s p ect ed o r

ev en s aw t h e car h au ler i n t h i s cas e n o r h ad he b een o n t h e u pp er d eck o f an y v eh i cl e

t ran s po rt t rai l er. Dr. Co h en d i d n ot o ffer hi s o p i ni o n r e g ard i n g t h e act ual cau s e o f

6 (Ci t at i on s o m i tt ed .) Id

., ci t in g Ku mh o Ti r e Co

. v. Ca r mi ch a el

, 5 2 6 U. S. 1 3 7,

1 4 1 (1 19 SCt 1 16 7, 1 4 3 LE2 d 2 3 8 ) (1 9 9 9 ).

7 (Em p h as i s o m i t t ed .)

6Den ni s ’ s fal l

, an d he co n ced ed th at h e h as n ev er i n s pect ed an y fal l p ro t ect i o n d es i gn s

o r s y s t em s fo r si m i lar car h au l ers , was u n aware o f t hei r co m p o n en t s o r co m

p o s i t i o n,

an d has n ev er b een s u b

ject t o p eer rev i ew o n t h es e t h eo ri es n o r co m p l et ed an y

s ci en t i fi c t es t i n g t o s u p po rt t h em

.

Becau s e Dr. Co hen ’ s o pi n i o n was n o t th e p ro d u ct of rel i ab l e p ri n ci p l es o r

m et h o ds

, h e d i d no t i n s p ect t h e car h au l e r at i ss u e i n th i s cas e, it i s un cl ear wh at

an al y s i s h e ap pl ied

, an d he d o es n o t h av e an o p i n i o n reg ard i n g p ro x i m at e cau s e, h i s

t es t i m o ny d oes n ot m eet t h e req u i rem en ts o f OCGA § 2 4 -7 -7 02 (b ). Un d er t h es e

ci rcu m s t an ces , t h e t ri al co u rt d i d n o t ab u s e i t s di s cret io n b y ex cl u d i ng Dr. Co h en ’ s

t es t i m o ny

. 8

2

. Th e M o o res co n t en d t h at t h e t ri al co urt ab u s ed i ts d i s cret i on b y st ri k i n g Dr.

M o rs e’ s affi d av it . Ag ai n , we d i s ag ree.

Th e i m p o si t io n o f s ch ed u l i n g d ead l i n e s fo r t h e id en t i fi cat i on o f

ex p ert s , an d q ues ti o n s reg ard i n g t h e ad m i s s i o n o r ex cl u s i o n o f e x p e rt

t es t i m o n y , are l eft t o t h e bro ad d i s cret i o n o f th e t ri al co urt

. An d we h av e

h el d t h at a tri al co urt m ay ex erci s e i ts d i s cret i o n an d ex cl u de t es t i m o n y

8 See Bu t l er v. Un i o n Ca r b i d e Co r p. , 3 1 0 Ga. A p p

. 2 1

, 2 5 -3 0 (1 ) (7 1 2 S E 2 d

5 3 7 ) (2 0 1 5 ).

7fro m an ex p ert n o t p ro p erl y i d en t i fi ed b y a part y , wh en d o n e i n vi o l at i o n

o f an ex pres s co u rt o rd er. 9

Here, th e s ch ed u li n g o rd er ex p res s l y req u i red t h e Mo ores t o i d e n t i fy an y

ex p ert s o n o r befo re Decem b er 1

, 2 0 1 1

. In s t ead

, th e M o o res d i d no t id en t i fy Dr.

M o rs e as an ex p ert u n t il M ay 1 6

, 2 0 1 4

, fo u r d ay s befo re t h e s u m m ary ju d g m en t

m o ti o n h eari n g

. U n der th es e ci rcu m s t an ces , t h e t ri al co u rt d i d n ot ab u s e i t s d i s cret i o n

b y s t ri k i n g Dr. M o rs e’ s affi d av i t

. 1 0

3

. Th e M o o res al s o arg u e t h at t h e t r i a l c o u r t erred b y g ran t i n g s u m m ary

ju d g m en t t o Co t t rel l

.

Su m m ary ju d g m en t i s ap p ro p ri at e wh en n o g en u i n e i s s u es o f

m a t e ri al fact rem ai n an d t h e ev id en ce, co n s t ru ed in t h e l i g h t m o s t

9 (Ci t at i on s o m it t ed .) Ko hl er v. Va n Pet eg h em , 3 3 0 Ga. Ap p

. 2 3 0

, 2 3 8 (3 ) (7 6 7

SE2 d 7 7 5 ) ( 2 0 1 4 )

, ci t i n g Ca s wel l v. Ca s wel l

, 2 8 5 Ga. 27 7

, 2 8 0 (3 ) (6 7 5 SE2 d 1 9 ) (2 0 0 9); A g r i-Cycl e LLC v

. C o u c h

, 2 8 4 Ga. 90

, 9 3 (5 ) (6 6 3 SE2 d 1 7 5 ) (2 0 0 8 );

Va u gh a n v. W

el l st a r Hea l t h S

y s

. , 3 0 4 Ga. Ap p. 59 6

, 6 01 -6 0 2 (3 ) (6 9 6 SE2 d 5 0 6 ) (2 0 1 0); Co l l i n s v. Di ckma n , 2 9 5 Ga. Ap p

. 6 0 1

, 6 0 3 -6 0 4 (1 ) (6 72 SE2 d 4 3 3 ) (2 0 0 8 ).

1 0 See Ko hl er , 3 3 0 Ga. Ap p

. at 23 9 (3 ). W e are u n p ers u ad ed b y t h e M o o res ’ s

arg u m en t t hat OCGA § 9 -1 1 -6 (d ), wh i ch p erm i t s p art i es t o fi l e affi d av i t s o p p o s i n g

s u m m ary ju d g m en t no l at er t h an o n e d ay b efo re t h e d at e o f t h e h eari n g , ren d ers

u n en fo rceab l e t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s ex p res s o rd er reg ard in g t h e d ead l i n e fo r i d en t i fi cat i o n

o f ex p ert s

.

8fav o rab le to t h e n on m o v i n g p art y , warran ts ju dg m en t as a m at t er o f l aw.

A d efen dan t m ay o bt ai n s u m m ary ju d g m en t b y s h owi n g t hat t h ere i s n o

ev i d en ce s u ffi ci en t to creat e a ju ry i s s ue on at l eas t o n e es s en t i al el em en t

o f p l ai n t i ff’ s cas e. W e rev i ew a g ran t o f s u m m ary ju d gm en t d e n o v o. 1 1

(a) Des i g n Def ect Cl ai m s

. To p ro p erl y det erm in e w h et h er th e M o ores ’ s d es i g n

d e f e c t c l ai m s can p ro ceed in t h e ab s en ce o f t h ei r ex pert s ’ t es t i m on y , we m u s t

d et erm i n e wh et h er Geo rg i a o r M i s s is s i p p i l aw ap p l ies

. 1 2

Geo rg i a’ s ch o i ce-o f-l aw ru l es p ro v i d e t h e k ey fo r res o l v i n g t h i s

cl ai m o f erro r. Un d e r l ex l oci d el i ct i

, t o rt cas es are g ov ern ed b y th e

s u b s t an t i v e l aw of t h e s t at e wh ere t h e t o rt o r w ro n g o ccu rred

– in t h i s

cas e, [M i s s i s s i p pi ]

. Qu es t i o n s i n v o l v i n g p ro ced u re o r t he ap p ro p ri at e

rem ed y , h o wev er, are d eci d ed u s i n g t h e l aw o f t h e s t at e w h ere t h e act i o n

was fi l ed

. 1 3

Th e d et erm i n at i o n o f wh et h er t h e M o o res are req u i red t o p ro v i d e co m p et en t ex p ert

t es t i m o ny t o su p po rt t h ei r cl ai m s req u i res an an al y s i s o f p ro o f o f cau s at io n , wh i ch i s

1 1 (Ci t at i o n s an d p u n ct uat i o n o m it t ed .) Bu tl er , 3 10 Ga. Ap p. at 3 0 (2 ), q u o t i n g La u ’s Co r p

. v. Ha s ki n s , 2 6 1 G a. 4 9 1 (4 0 5 SE2 d 4 7 4 ) (1 9 9 1). See al s o O CGA § 9 -1 1

- 5 6 (c).

1 2 Th e t ri al co u rt an al y zed t h e i s su e o f wh et h er t h e Mo o res ’ s cl ai m s fai l ed

wi t h o u t an ex pert u n d er b ot h Geo rg ia an d M i s si ss i p p i l aw.

1 3 (Fo ot n o t es o m i tt ed .) Ba g n el l v. F o r d Mo t or Co

. , 2 9 7 Ga. Ap p

. 83 5

, 8 3 6 (1 ) (6 7 8 SE2 d 4 8 9 ) (2 0 0 9 ).

9an el em en t o f t he cl ai m an d t h erefo re g o vern ed by t h e su b st an t i v e l aw o f

M i s s is s i p p i

. 1 4

To reco v er fo r a p ro d u ct s l i ab i l i t y cas e u n d er t h e M i s s i s s i p p i Pro d uct s Li ab i l i t y

Act (t he “ M PLA”), a p l ai n t iff

m u s t es t ab l is h b y a p rep on d eran ce o f th e ev i den ce t hat : (1 ) t h e p ro d uct

was m an u fact u red o r d es i g n ed i n a d efect i v e m an n er, co n t ai n ed

i n ad eq u a te warn i n g s , or b reach ed an ex p res s warran t y t hat w as ju s t i fi ab l y rel i ed on wh en p u rch as ed ; an d ( 2 ) t h i s defect i v e co n d i t i o n

ren d ered th e p ro d u ct u nreas on ab l y d an g ero u s t o t h e u s er o r co n s u m er;

an d (3 ) t h e defect i v e an d u n reas o n ab l y d an g ero u s co n d i t i o n o f th e

p ro d u ct p ro x im at el y cau s ed t h e d am ag es fo r wh i ch reco v ery i s s o u g h t ;

an d (4 ) t h e d efect i v e co n d i t i o n ex i s t ed at th e t i m e t h e p ro d u ct l eft

co n t ro l o f t h e m an u fact u rer. 1 5

Th e M PLA fu rt her p ro v i d es :

[T] h e m a n u f

a c t u r e r

. . . s h al l n o t b e l i ab l e i f t he [p l ai n t iff] d o es n o t

p ro v e b y th e p rep o n d eran ce o f t h e ev i d en ce t h at at t h e t i m e t he p ro d uct

l eft t h e co n tro l o f th e m an u fact u rer

. . . (i ) [t ] h e m an ufact u rer

. . . k n ew,

o r i n l i gh t o f reas o n ab l y av ai l ab l e kn o w l ed g e o r i n t h e ex erci s e o f

1 4 See id

. at 8 3 8 (2 ) (ap p l y i n g Tex as l aw t o d et erm i n e wh et h er ev id en ce was ad m i s s i b l e wh en pro v i ng cau s at i o n i n a fai lu r e

- t o -warn cas e b ecau s e t he t o rt occu rred

i n Tex as ).

1 5 Co t h r en v. Ba xt er Hea l t h ca r e Co r p

. , 7 9 8 F.Su p p

. 2 d 7 7 9

, 7 8 2 (III) (S.D.

M i s s

. 2 0 1 1 ), ci t i n g M i s s . Co d e An n . § 1 1 -1 -6 3 (a).

10reas o n ab l e care s h o u l d h av e k no wn , a b o u t t he d an g er t h at cau s ed th e

d am ag e fo r wh i ch r e c o very i s s o u g h t ; an d (i i ) [t ] he pro d u ct fai l ed t o

fu n ct i o n as ex pect ed an d t h ere ex i s t ed a feas i b l e d es i g n al t ern at iv e t hat

wo u ld h av e t o a reas o n ab l e p ro b ab i l it y p rev en t ed t h e h arm

. A feas i bl e

d es i gn al t ern at i v e i s a d es i g n t h at wo u l d hav e t o a reas o n ab l e p ro bab i l i t y

p rev en t ed t he h arm wi th ou t i m p ai ri n g t h e u t i l i t y , u s efu ln es s , pract i cal i t y

o r d es irab i l it y

o f t h e p ro d u ct t o u s ers o r co n s u m ers

. 1 6

Th u s , u n d er M i s si s s i p p i l aw, a p l ai n t i ff m u st d em on s t rat e t h at t h e p ro d u ct was

d efect i ve an d t h at a feas i b le al t ern at i v e wo u ld h av e p rev en t ed t h e al l eg ed h arm

.

Ev i d e n ce o f a d es i g n d efect m u s t b e s u pp o rt ed b y ex p ert t es t i m o n y , an d t he fai l u re

t o d es i g n at e an ex pert wh o i s p rep ared t o o ffer s u ch ev i d en ce d em o n s t rat es t h e l ack

o f a p r i ma f

a ci e cas e.” 1 7

Here, wi t ho u t ex p e r t t es t i m o n y , th e M o o res h av e fai l ed to p ro v id e ev i d en ce

t h at an y al l e g e d d e f

e ct i n t he d es i gn o f t h e car h au l er ren d ered t h e p ro d u ct

1 6 M is s . Co d e. An n

. § 1 1 -1 -6 3 (f).

1 7 Co t h r en , 7 9 8 F.Su p p . 2 d at 7 8 2 (II). See al so El l i o t v. Ama da s In du s

., In c. , 7 9 6 F. Su p p

. 2 d 79 6

, 80 3 (II) (B) (2 ) (S.D. M i s s. 2 0 1 1 ) (g ran t i n g s u m m ary ju d g m en t

t o t h e d efen s e aft er ex cl ud i n g t h e t es t i m o n y o f t he pl ai n t i ffs ’ ex pert i n d es i g n d efect

cas e); Br o wn v. GMC

, 4 So .3 d 4 0 0

, 40 2 -4 0 3 (M i s s

. Ct

. Ap p

. 2 0 0 9 ) (affi rm i n g t h e

g ran t o f s u m

m ary ju dg m en t t o t h e d efen d an t b ecau s e t h e p l a i n t i ff fai l ed to p ro v i d e

an y ex p ert t es t i m o ny

i n s up p o rt o f h er d es i g n an d m an ufact uri n g d efect cl ai m s ).

11u n reas o nab l y d an g ero u s o r t hat a f e a s ib l e des i g n al t ern at i v e ex i s t ed at th e t i m e o f

Den ni s ’ s acci d en t t hat wo u l d h av e p rev en t ed t h e h arm w i t ho u t i m p ai ri n g t h e u t i l i t y ,

u s efu l n es s , p ract i cal i t y , o r d es i rab i l i t y o f t h e car h au l er. Un der t h es e ci rcu m s t an ces ,

t h e t ri al co u rt p ro p erl y g ran t ed s u m m ary ju d g m en t t o Co t trel l as t o t h e M o o res ’ s

d es i g n d efect cl ai m s

. 1 8

(b ) Fa i l u r e-t o -w a r n. Th e M o o res arg ue t h at t h e t ri al co u rt erred b y g ran t i n g

s u m m ary ju dg m en t o n th is cl ai m becau se n o n e o f th e warn i n g s t i ck ers o n t h e car

h au ler o r i n t h e o perat o r’ s m an u a l p ro v i d ed i n fo rm at i o n o n pro p er p l acem en t

,

s ecu ri n g m ech an is m s , an d us ag e o f th e lad d er. Bu t Den n i s can n o t recal l wh et h er o r

n o t t h e c a r h au l er fro m wh i ch he fel l had w arn i n g l ab el s reg ard i n g t h e l ad d ers , an d

h e ad m it t ed o n l y t h at h e read “ s o m e” o f t h e o perat o r’ s m an ual

. Un d er M is s i s s i p pi

l aw, “ [t ] h e p res en ce o r ab s en ce o f an y t h in g i n an u n read [p ro d u ct ] m an ual s i m p l y

can n ot p ro x im at el y

cau s e a p l ai n t iff’ s dam ag es

. ” 1 9 M o re i m p o rt an t l y , t h e M o o res ’ s

fai l u re-t o-warn cl ai m s es s en t i al l y al l eg e t h at Co t t rel l fai l ed t o warn Den n i s ab o u t t h e

1 8 S e e C o t h r en , 7 98 F.Su p p

. 2 d at 7 8 2 ; Gr an t v. F or d Mo t o r Co

. , 8 9 So

. 3 d

6 5 5

, 6 7 5 (III) (B) (M i ss

. Ct

. Ap p

. 2 0 1 2 ) (“ I n o r d e r t o p ro v e cau s at i o n , a p o t en t i al

p l ai n t i ff m

u s t o f f e r e x p ert t es t i m o n y th at t h e p ro d u ct was d efect i v e.

. . . W i t h o ut

ex p ert t es t i m o n y , t h e p l ai n t i ff can no t p ro v e cau s a t i o n o r d efect

. . . an d can n ot

m ai n t ai n h er cl ai m as a m at t er o f l aw.”). See al s o Bu t l er , 3 10 Ga. Ap p. at 3 0 (2 ).

1 9 Pa l mer v. Vo l

ks wa g en o f Amer i ca

, In c. , 9 04 So

. 2 d 1 0 77

, 1 0 8 4 (M i ss

. 2 0 0 5 ).

12u s e o f m ech an i s m s , in cl u d i n g l ad d er h o o k s , wi t h wh i ch th e car h au l er at i s s u e was n ot

eq u ip p ed at t h e ti m e o f hi s acci d en t

. Un d er t h e s e ci rcu m st an ces , th e t ri al co u rt

p ro p erl y g ran t ed s u m

m ary ju d g m en t o n t h e M oo res ’ s fai lu re-t o -warn cl ai m

.

Ju d g men t a f f i r med

. Ph i

p p s

, P. J., R a

y a n d McMi l l i a n

, JJ., co n cu r

. El l i n g t o n,

P. J., co ncu r

s i n j u d g men t o n l y. Ba r n es

, P. J. a n d McFa d d en , J., d i s sen t

.

13A1 5 A0 80 2 . M O ORE et al . v . COTTRELL, INC.

M C F A D D E N , J u d g e, d i ss en t in g

.

It i s n o b as i s fo r o b

j ect io n t h at p l ai n ti ffs ’ fi rs t ex p ert d i d n o t p ers o n al ly i n s p ect

t h e car h au l er. Dr. Co h en h o ld s a Ph .D. i n Hu m an Fact o rs an d Erg o n o m i cs an d h as

m ad e a p art icu l ar s t u d y of car h au l ers

. As t h e t ri al co u rt h e l d

, “ h e i s q u al i fi ed to

t es t i fy a s an ex p ert i n , es s en t i al l y , s afet y i s s ues rel at ed to fal l s .” A qu al i fi ed ex p ert

“ i s free t o o p i n e ab ou t a co m pl i cat ed m at t er w i th o u t an y fi rs t h an d k n o wl ed g e o f t h e

fact s i n t h e cas e, an d b as ed u p o n o th erwi se i n ad m i s s i b l e h ears ay i f t h e fact s o r d at a

are ‘ o f a t y

p e reas o n ab l y rel i ed u p o n b y ex p ert s i n t h e p ar t i c u l a r f iel d i n fo rm i n go p i n i o n s o r i n feren ces up o n t h e s u b ject .’ ” HNTB Geo r

g i a v. Ha mi l t o n -Ki n g , 2 8 7 Ga.

6 4 1

, 64 5 -4 6 (6 9 7 SE2 d 7 7 0 ) (2 0 1 0 ) q uo t i n g U n i t ed S t at es v. Fr a z i er , 3 87 F3 d 1 2 4 4,

1 2 6 0 (1 1 t h Ci r. 2 0 0 4 ).

If Dr. Co h en can b e fau lt ed

, i t i s fo r b el ab o ri ng th e o b v i o u s

. M o o re fel l b ecau s e

h e h ad n ei t h er a h an dh ol d n o r a fu n ct i o n al l ad d er. H e was cl i n gi n g b y h i s fi n g ert i p s

t o th e ro o f o f a v ery l arg e SUV, m an eu v eri n g s i d eway s wi t h hi s feet o n l y p art i al l y o n

a n arro w b eam

. In t he rai n

. W h en hi s fo o t s l i pp ed

, h e h ad n o t h i ng t o h an g o n t o

. So

h e fel l.

Dr. Co h en ’ s t es t i m on y m i g h t s h ed ad d i ti o n al l ig h t

, b u t i t was n ot neces s ary to

av o id s u m

m ary ju d g m en t

. Geo rg i a l aw i m po s es no acro s s -t h e-b o ard req u i rem en t o f

ex p ert t es t i m o n y in p ro d u ct s l i ab i l it y cas es

. Th i s co urt h as rep eat ed l y fo u n d i n s u ch

cas es t h at ex p ert t es t i m o n y w as n o t n eces s ary

. See Owen s v. Gen er a l Mo t o r s Co rp

. ,

2 7 2 G a. A p p

. 84 2

, 8 4 7-8 4 8 (2 ) (b ) (6 1 3 SE2 d 6 5 1 ) (2 0 0 5 ) (ex p ert t es ti m o n y n ot

n eed ed t o p ro v e al l eg ed d efect cau s ed i n j u ry ); W i l li a ms v. Amer i ca n Med . S ys t ems ,

2 4 8 Ga. Ap p

. 6 8 2

, 6 83 (1 ) (5 4 8 SE2 d 3 7 1 ) (2 0 0 1 ) (cl ai m s u rv i v ed s u m m ary ju d g m en t

wi t h o u t ex pert t es t i m o n y ). See al s o W i l l i a m s v. Ma s t Bi o s u r

g er y US A

, 6 4 4 F3 d 1 3 1 2,

1 3 1 9 (II) (B) (1 1 t h Ci r. 2 0 1 1 ) (ap p l y i n g Geo rg i a l aw).

2As fo r M i s si s s i p p i

, i t i s t ru e t h at th e fed eral o p i n i o n s ci ted b y t h e m ajo ri t y

co n tai n s o m e l an g u ag e s u gg es t i n g t h at i t s d o es i m p o s e su ch an acro s s -t h e-b o ard

req u i rem en t

. Bu t t h e Su p rem e Co u rt o f th at s t at e h as h el d o t h erwi s e: i t h as ru l ed t h at

t h e i s s u e m

us t b e ap p ro ach ed “ o n a cas e-b y -cas e b as i s.” Fo r b es v. Gen

. Mo t o r s Co rp

. ,

9 3 5 So

. 2 d 8 69

, 8 7 8 (M i s s

. 20 0 6 ). An d t he Mi s s is s i p p i C o u rt o f A p p eal s o p i n i o n

ci t ed b y t h e m ajo ri t y si m

p l y n o t es wi t h o u t co m

m en t t h at t h e tri al co u rt h ad “ ru l ed t h at

Bro w n w as n o t req u i red t o h av e an ex p ert i n b i o m ech an i cs t es t i fy i n o rd er t o es t ab l i s h

p ro x im at e cau s at i o n [o f an ai r-b ag fai l ure] ; t h erefo r e , G M ’ s m o t i o n fo r s u m m ary

ju d g m en t o n t h at i s s u e was den i ed .” Br o wn v. Gen

. Mo t o r s Co r p

. , 4 So

. 3 d 4 0 0

, 4 0 1

(M i ss . Ct . Ap p . 2 00 9 ).

Fo r t h o se reas o n s I wo u l d h o l d t h at t h e tri al co u rt erred i n ex cl u di n g Dr.

Co h en ’ s t es t i m o n y an d m o reo v er t h at ex pert t e s t i m o n y w as n ot n eces sary t o av o id

s u m m ary ju d g m en t . I t h erefo re res pect fu l l y d i s s en t

.

I am au t h o ri zed t o s t at e t h at Pres i d i n g J u d g e Barn es jo i ns i n t h i s d i s s en t

.

3