Brown v. Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway Co.

Dist. Ct. did not err in granting defendant-employer’s motion for summary judgment in instant FELA action, alleging that defendant negligently caused cumulative trauma to plaintiff-employee’s wrists, elbow and shoulder through use of vibrating tools, after determining to exclude opinion of plaintiff’s medical expert witness. Dist. Ct. could properly exclude opinion of plaintiff’s medical expert, where said expert failed to follow reliable methods when finding that plaintiff’s work environment caused his injuries, since expert failed to personally observe plaintiff’s working conditions, obtain written work description, perform scientific tests or investigate several potential non-work-related causes of plaintiff’s health problems. Moreover, although plaintiff argued that defendant had frustrated attempt by plaintiff’s expert to test plaintiff’s work-related tools and had failed to provide expert with written job description, such alleged problems did not excuse expert’s failure to generate admissible opinion, and plaintiff should have otherwise alerted Dist. Ct. to such problems during discovery phase of case.