Court: Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County
Case Name: Delgado v. Markwort Sporting Goods Co.
Citation: 2006 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 685
This case involves product liability claims against the manufacturer of flag football belts. The plaintiff alleged that she was permanently and severely injured while playing in a women’s flag football game when her right ring finger became stuck in the D ring of an opposing player’s flag football belt. The plaintiff claimed that the defendant had defectively designed, engineered, packaged, shipped, and sold the flag football belt. The plaintiff retained a sports & recreation expert witness to testify to the finger-trapping dangers of the belt’s design and that the belt had been defectively designed. Further, the expert opined that there were other flag football belts available with safer designs and that the D ring was the causal competent of the plaintiff’s injury.
The Sports & Recreation Expert Witness
The sports & recreation expert witness was a retired Associate Director of Capital & Strategic Initiatives at the Ohio State University Department of Recreational Sports with 39 years of experience. The expert held MSc and PhD degrees in Physical Education. He also edited the National Intramural-Recreational Sports Association Rules (NIRSA) and was co-editor of the official manual. In addition to comprehensive educational practices related to other competitive and intramural sports projects, he held touch and flag football seminars and gave a number of lectures on the official manual and NIRSA rules at NIRSA conferences. He had also engaged in the review of NIRSA flag football belts, the assessment of NIRSA member institutions on flag and touch football rules, and the study of injuries during these games. He was inducted into the United States Flag and Touch Football Hall of Fame in 1989. The expert had observed tens of thousands of flag football games.
The sports & recreation expert witness opined that the defendant’s flag football belt did not adhere to the 1993 and 1994 flag and touch football rules nor the NIRSA official manual—of which the expert was an editor. At trial, however, the expert was unable to establish that, in reality, the NIRSA rules were in use by either the belt manufacturers or customers.
The defendant objected, among a number of reasons, to the expert’s testimony because he had never educated or engaged in the design or manufacturing of these belts. The defendant also argued that the sports & recreation expert had not testified using evidence on the occurrence of injuries involving their belt or similar belts. The defendant asserted that the expert had failed to conduct any testing on their belt or conduct any research.
The court observed that though the expert had not been engaged in the design or production of the flag football belts, his practical experience was adequate qualification as an expert witness in this product liability case, citing Caprara v Chrysler Corp. Furthermore, the court explained that the product in question was simple, and the basic principles and processes of minimal-contact football were fairly well understood. With his thorough knowledge in physical education and expertise in the usage of flag football belts, the court ruled that the expert was qualified to testify to the risks of the defendant’s belt and of other available flag football belts. The court did, however, note that the expert was not eligible to testify to all considerations related to the assessment of the faulty design. But given the expert’s education and experience, the court deemed him well suited to opine on consumer fair standards for the flag football belt.
The motion to exclude the sports & recreation expert witness’s testimony was denied.