The defendants brought a mid-trial motion to disqualify the plaintiffs' expert witness, a forensic psychiatrist, for the damages phase of the trial.
The defendants argued the expert's report did not comply with prior admissibility rulings, lacked expert evidence, and exhibited bias.
The court found that the expert's methodology in calculating the impact of harms on the plaintiffs' institutionalization timeline was within his expertise and complied with prior rulings.
The court rejected the allegations of bias, finding the expert's evolving views on patients reflected objective reliability rather than advocacy.
The motion was dismissed, and the expert report was ruled admissible, with any stray comments outside his expertise to be disregarded.