Lundquist v. First National Insurance Company of America

Opinion

1 2 3 4

5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA 9 10 CAMERON LUNDQUIST, an individual, CASE NO. 18-5301 RJB 11 and LEEANA LARA, an individual, on behalf of themselves and all others ORDER DENYING MOTIONS TO 12 similarly situated, EXCLUDE EXPERT TESTIMONY AND OPINIONS 13 Plaintiffs, v. 14 FIRST NATIONAL INSURANCE 15 COMPANY OF AMERICA, a New Hampshire Corporation, and LM 16 GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY, an Illinois Corporation, and CCC 17 INFORMATION SERVICES INCORPORATED, a Delaware 18 Corporation, 19 Defendants.

20 THIS MATTER comes before the Court on Defendants First National Insurance 21 Company of America and LM General Insurance Company’s (collectively “Liberty”) Motion to 22 Strike Expert Reports of Berglund and Schwickerath for purposes of Class Certification (Dkt. 23 224; filed in redacted form at Dkt. 222), Defendant CCC Information Services Inc.’s (“CCC”) 24 1 Motion to Exclude the Testimony and Report of Dr. Lance Kaufman (Dkt. 229; filed in redacted 2 form at Dkt. 227), CCC’s Motion to Exclude the Testimony and Report of David A. 3 Schwickerath (Dkt. 233; filed in redacted form at Dkt. 231), and CCC’s Motion to Exclude the 4 Testimony and Report of William J. Berglund (Dkt. 237; filed in redacted form at Dkt. 235).

5 The Court has considered the pleadings filed regarding the motions and the remaining file. Oral 6 argument on these motions is not required for their resolution. 7 Motions to Exclude. The Defendants’ motions to exclude the testimony and opinions of 8 Berglund, Schwickerath and Kaufman (Dkts. 222, 224, 227, 229, 231, 233, 235, and 237) should 9 be denied in so far as they seek to exclude the testimony and reports from consideration on the 10 motion for class certification. Plaintiffs have sufficiently shown that these experts’ opinions 11 satisfy the criteria required by Fed. R. Evid. 702 and set out in Daubert v. Merrell Dow 12 Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993), for purposes of the class certification motion. The 13 expert opinions offered here show only possible approaches and no finding is made here on the 14 merits of any expert opinion. The denial of these motions to exclude are without prejudice to a

15 renewal of the motions, if appropriate, either as motions in limine or pursuant to Daubert 16 motions. 17 ORDER 18 It is ORDERED that: 19 • Liberty’s Motion to Strike Expert Reports of Berglund and Schwickerath for 20 purposes of Class Certification (Dkt. 224; filed in redacted form at Dkt. 222), 21 Defendant CCC’s Motion to Exclude the Testimony and Report of Dr. Lance 22 Kaufman (Dkt. 229; filed in redacted form at Dkt. 227), CCC’s Motion to 23 Exclude the Testimony and Report of David A. Schwickerath (Dkt. 233; filed in

24 1 redacted form at Dkt. 231), and CCC’s Motion to Exclude the Testimony and 2 Report of William J. Berglund (Dkt. 237; filed in redacted form at Dkt. 235) ARE 3 DENIED. 4 The Clerk is directed to send uncertified copies of this Order to all counsel of record and

5 to any party appearing pro se at said party’s last known address. 6 Dated this 13th day of October, 2020. A 7

8 ROBERT J. BRYAN United States District Judge 9

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24