Brain Injury Legal Cases

In Chiulli v. Newberry Fine Dining, Inc., Civil Action Number 10-10488-JLT (U.S.D.C. MA. October 17, 2012), the Federal District Court denied defendant’s motion in limine to preclude plaintiff’s neuroimaging expert Randall Benson, M.D. from testifying and to preclude testimony with regard to diffusion tensor imaging.
Continue Reading Federal Court in Massachusetts Upholds Admissibility of Diffusion Tensor Imaging

On July 24, 2012, a Palm Beach County Florida Circuit Court held an evidentiary hearing on plaintiff’s objections to defendant’s request for a neuropsychological compulsory medical examination in the case of Voluck v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, Case Number 502011 CA003642XXXXMB AI, State Farm requested a neuropsychological examination to be conducted by Dr. David Bush.
Continue Reading Florida Court Admits Taping of Defense Neuropsychological Exam Over Objection of Defense Neuropsychologist

Diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) has been shown to prove the existence of brain damage which other techniques, such as MRIs, CT scans and x-rays were unable to detect. DTI has the ability to show microscopic damage to the pathways, which messages use when traveling inside the brain.
For the past 10 years, the National Football League and the US military have been using DTI technologies to detect brain injuries, most commonly, concussions.
Continue Reading Defense Attorneys Question the Validity of Diffusion Tensor Imaging

Readers of my blog will recall that I often write about the use of a total offset when calculating future lost income. Too often, plaintiffs’ attorneys hire economic analysts who, in projecting future economic losses, net you a negative discount rate. This has the effect of reducing the overall projection of future lost income.
Continue Reading Inflation Outstrips the Rate of Return

Earlier this week, 75 retired players brought suit against the National Football League claiming that the NFL has known for the past 90 years of the harmful effects associated with football-related concussions and concealed this information from players, coaches and trainers. The suit states that the players relied upon the NFL for safety guidelines and regulations, and did not know the long-term effects associated with concussions. Riddell, Inc., the official helmet brand of the NFL for over 20 years, is also named as a defendant in the suit.
Continue Reading Former NFL Players Bring Suit Against League

In another victory for the admissibility of PET Scan and Diffusion Tensor Imaging, William D. Harper, Esq., a Woodbury, Minnesota trial attorney was successful in having PET and DTI admitted. In its decision, the Court found that “it is clear to me that the technology involving PET scans and DTI is something that is not novel to the medical industry. It is not novel science, it has been around for maybe some 20 years, and is relied upon by medical professionals in a number of settings.”
Continue Reading Minnesota Trial Court Admits Diffusion Tensor Imaging and PET Scans

A Hillsborough County, Florida, trial court has denied a defendant’s Frye challenge regarding the admissibility of MRI with DTI and the admissibility of SPECT scan. Hammer v. Sentinel Insurance Company, Case No. 08-019984 (13th Judicial Circuit, Hillsborough County, Florida, September 27, 2010).
Continue Reading Florida Court Upholds Admissibility of Diffusion Tensor Imaging and SPECT Scan

On September 13, 2010, a Massachusetts trial court in the matter of Sawski v. Gigs, LLC held a Daubert/Lanigan II hearing with regard to the admissibility or non admissibility of diffusion tensor imaging (DTI). The parties did not request an evidentiary hearing but submitted over 3000 pages of affidavits, medical articles and memorandum.
Continue Reading Massachusetts court finds DTI satisfies Daubert Standard

Defendants in the matter of Delgado v. Frovarp sought an order compelling the plaintiff to appear for a neuropsychological examination outside the presence of any third parties, including plaintiff’s counsel. In this case, defendants retained William B. Barr, Ph.D. to conduct a neuropsychological evaluation of the plaintiff.
Continue Reading New York Court permits third party observer during neuropsychological examination

In the matter of Whilden v. Kimberly Kline, et al., defendants filed a motion in limine to bar the testimony of William W. Orrison, Ph.D. and to bar the admissibility of diffusion tensor imaging. Plaintiff was involved in a number of motor vehicle collisions in which it was alleged that he had suffered a mild traumatic brain injury.
Continue Reading Colorado Court Finds Diffusion Tensor Imaging (DTI) Admissible