Katz v. Tractor Supply Co., Inc., No. CV N18C-11-008 ALR, 2020 WL 1287754 (Del. Super. Ct. Mar. 16, 2020)

A breach of warranty claim must be supported with expert testimony, but can plaintiff be his own expert?

In Delaware, a personal injury claim for breach of warranty arising from a product’s defect requires proof that the product was actually defective and that the defect caused the injury. Expert testimony typically is required to prove a product is defective and “always is required if the matter in issue is one within the knowledge of experts only and not within the common knowledge of laymen.” Even when the matter is one within the common knowledge of laypeople, expert testimony is necessary unless circumstantial evidence tends “to negate other reasonable causes of the injury sustained.” The plaintiff insisted throughout discovery that he would not retain an expert. He then missed the deadline to produce expert reports but ultimately argued that he could present as a metallurgy and/or engineering expert. The court has held this decision on summary judgment in abeyance until the Daubert hearing can occur to test the plaintiff’s ability to be his own expert. The hearing is currently scheduled for July 2020.

 

 

Case Law Alerts, 3rd Quarter, July 2020 is prepared by Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin to provide information on recent developments of interest to our readers. This publication is not intended to provide legal advice for a specific situation or to create an attorney-client relationship. Copyright © 2020 Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin, all rights reserved. This article may not be reprinted without the express written permission of our firm.