The role of the expert can be a decisive factor in a maritime lawsuit. A medical expert can help prove why a tankerman’s illness is linked to certain cargoes. An expert on naval architecture can help prove that a vessel capsized due to water from firefighting efforts, not deficiencies in its design. As one might expect, the use of experts must follow strict legal standards. A recent federal court case from the Eastern District of Louisiana may help illustrate this.
The case involves a roustabout injured in December 2023 while disconnecting a jet line hose aboard a jack-up rig operating in the Gulf of Mexico. He hadn’t known the hose was still pressurized, and it struck his hand. This caused a “gamekeeper’s fracture,” an injury involving the ulnar collateral ligament at the base of the thumb.
When the roustabout sued, the rig’s operators hired a petroleum engineer as an expert. The expert noted that although the accident report recommended improved procedures for jet hose removal, it did not state that proper, safe hand placement would have prevented the injury.
Attorneys for the roustabout filed a motion to challenge the opinions and testimony of the petroleum engineer, requesting that his testimony be excluded. They argued that the methodology of his opinions was speculative and conclusory.
The court ruled in favor of the oil rig interests and denied the request to exclude the engineer’s testimony. The court referred to Rule 702 of the Federal Rules of Evidence. This rule sets the legal standard for expert witnesses. It says that expert witnesses who are qualified by their specialized knowledge may present their expert opinion when (a) the expert’s specialized knowledge will help the court understand the evidence, (b) the testimony is based on sufficient facts, (c) the testimony is the product of reliable principles; and (d) the testimony ties those principles to the case at hand.
Keep in mind, just because an expert is permitted to remain on a case, the battle isn’t over. Experts can come under fire from the other side and have their theories challenged during cross-examination.
