Court: Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings CountyJurisdiction: FederalCase Name: Delgado v. Markwort Sporting Goods Co.Citation: 2006 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 685
This case highlights an expert specialty that arguably requires both technical and practical experience: sports & recreation. Here, the defendant flag football belt manufacturer argues that the plaintiff’s sports & recreation expert does not have the design or manufacturing expertise to opine on whether the belt in question caused the plaintiff’s injury.
The court considers this argument, however, it determines the flag football belt is of simple design and that the expert could opine on how the belt is involved during play and on the alternate belts on the market. The expert could not speak to whether there was faulty design, but rather on the mechanics of players’ physical activity and belt usage in this type of sport.
Facts
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 Plaintiff’s 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.
Discussion
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.
Ruling
The defendant’s motion to exclude the sports & recreation expert witness’s testimony was denied.
Key Takeaways for Experts
This case demonstrates a specialty where technical education and practical experience are valuable in the eyes of the court. The defendant attempted to argue the expert was not qualified to opine on manufacturing topics, however, the court specifies that the sports & recreation expert isn’t speaking about the design itself, but rather, how the belt interacts with players’ physical activities both from his experience with regulation rules and personal observation of flag football games.
About the author
Zach Barreto
Zach Barreto is a distinguished professional in the legal industry, currently serving as the Senior Vice President of Research at the Expert Institute. With a deep understanding of a broad range of legal practice areas, Zach's expertise encompasses personal injury, medical malpractice, mass torts, defective products, and many other sectors. His skills are particularly evident in handling complex litigation matters, including high-profile cases like the Opioids litigation, NFL Concussion Litigation, California Wildfires, 3M earplugs, Elmiron, Transvaginal Mesh, NFL Concussion Litigation, Roundup, Camp Lejeune, Hernia Mesh, IVC filters, Paraquat, Paragard, Talcum Powder, Zantac, and many others.
Under his leadership, the Expert Institute’s research team has expanded impressively from a single member to a robust team of 100 professionals over the last decade. This growth reflects his ability to navigate the intricate and demanding landscape of legal research and expert recruitment effectively. Zach has been instrumental in working on nationally significant litigation matters, including cases involving pharmaceuticals, medical devices, toxic chemical exposure, and wrongful death, among others.
At the Expert Institute, Zach is responsible for managing all aspects of the research department and developing strategic institutional relationships. He plays a key role in equipping attorneys for success through expert consulting, case management, strategic research, and expert due diligence provided by the Institute’s cloud-based legal services platform, Expert iQ.
Educationally, Zach holds a Bachelor's degree in Political Science and European History from Vanderbilt University.
