The defendant sought to proceed with a summary judgment motion, but an issue remained regarding the cross-examination of experts.
The plaintiff argued the matter was too complicated for summary judgment and should proceed to trial.
The court rejected this argument, holding that the defendant was entitled to have its motion heard.
The court directed that the experts be cross-examined in open court on all issues relating to their reports, not just their qualifications, to allow the court to exercise its gatekeeper function regarding the admissibility of the evidence.
