Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Kasper v. The Board of Supervisors of Lauderdale County

United States District Court, S.D. Mississippi, Northern Division

October 18, 2017

GLENN KASPER PLAINTIFF
v.
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF LAUDERDALE COUNTY, MS, ET AL. DEFENDANTS

          OPINION AND ORDER

          William H. Barbour, Jr. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

         This cause is before the Court on the Motion of Defendants to Exclude the Expert Testimony of Andrew J. Scott. Having considered the pleadings, the attachments thereto, as well as supporting and opposing authorities, the Court finds the Motion is well taken and should be granted.

         I. Factual Background and Procedural History

         In May of 2014, Glenn Kasper (“Kasper”) was driving his vehicle in Lauderdale County, Mississippi. Kasper alleges that after he briefly stopped at the Allen Swamp Road and Pine Springs Road intersection, the driver's side window of his vehicle was “smashed” by a Lauderdale County deputy. Kasper further alleges that during this incident he was: (1) never asked for his license, registration, or proof of insurance; (2) yelled at; (3) grabbed and pulled head-first from his vehicle by several deputies; (4) assaulted, i.e. had his head smashed into the pavement; and (5) tazed. See Am. Compl. ¶ 6. A deputy then allegedly made a charge against Kasper of driving under the influence - third offense or greater to the dispatch officer. Id. at ¶ 6(e). According to Kasper, the charge was based on the mistaken belief that he was his brother, Christopher Kasper.

         After being transported to the Lauderdale County Detention Center, Kasper alleges he was strip searched and his requests for a breathalyzer test were denied. Id. at ¶ 6(h), (i). Kasper was later charged with driving under the influence of other substances first offense, resisting arrest, disregard of a traffic device, and three counts of disorderly conduct/failure to obey. Id. at ¶ 6(j). All charges, with the exception of two counts of disorderly conduct/failure to obey, were later dismissed. Thereafter, Kasper filed suit against the Board of Supervisors of Lauderdale County (“Board”), the Mississippi Highway Patrol (“MHP”), and various employees of those entities[1] alleging, inter alia, that they had violated his constitutional rights based on the manner in which he was arrested and detained. During the course of litigation, Kasper designated Andrew J. Scott (“Scott”) as an expert in the field of police practice and procedure. Defendants have now moved to exclude Scott from testifying as an expert in this case.

         II. Discussion

         On January 13, 2017, Kasper designated Scott as an expert in the field of police practice and procedure. See Designation [Docket No. 40]. In his designation, Kasper includes the following:

Scott will provide testimony regarding the police practice and procedure, including but not limited to excessive use [of] force, including but not limited to use of a taser, improper police practices and procedures, wrongful [] arrest, roadblocks, and police training.
No formal reports have been prepared at this time. However, we expect that Mr. Scott's opinion and bases thereof will be supported by the pleadings in this action, [a]nswers to discovery request[s], deposition testimony, and any information revealed through the discovery process.

Id. at ¶ 1(a) and (b). Defendants have now moved to exclude Scott from testifying on the grounds that he was not properly designated as an expert.

         As regards expert witnesses, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure require the following:

(A) [A] party must disclose to the other parties the identity of any witness it may use at trial to present evidence under Federal Rule of Evidence 702, 703, or 705.
(B) Unless otherwise stipulated or ordered by the court, this disclosure must be accompanied by a written report - prepared and signed by the witness - if the witness is one retained or specially employed to provide expert testimony in the case or one whose duties as the party's ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.