Rudd v. General Motors Corp.
United States District Court for the Middle District of Alabama
127 F. Supp. 1330 (2001)
Rudd (plaintiff) was injured when a fan blade broke loose on his GM (defendant) truck, and his expert, mechanical engineer Edmondson, could not identify a specific manufacturing defect but testified he could circumstantially rule out all other causes -- confirming Rudd had properly maintained the truck per GM's manual and that the fan blade was undamaged before the incident -- concluding the fan must have been defective, based on his experience and two failure-analysis studies on fan-fatigue fractures. GM moved for summary judgment, arguing Edmondson's testimony was unreliable and inadmissible.
Whether, under Rule 702 of the Federal Rules of Evidence, expert testimony must be based on sufficient data and reliable principles and methods reliably applied by the expert to the facts in order to be considered reliable.