A Louisiana woman is seeking a new trial after a contentious legal battle over an automobile accident and the admissibility of expert testimony. Michelle Leininger filed her complaint in the Civil District Court for Orleans Parish on January 7, 2020, against Brittanie Heaney, The Sherwin-Williams Company, and ACE American Insurance Company.
The case stems from a motor vehicle accident that occurred on January 9, 2019, involving Leininger and Heaney in New Orleans. At the time of the accident, Heaney was acting within the scope of her employment with Sherwin-Williams, which was insured by ACE. Leininger claims she suffered significant injuries including neck and back injuries as well as chronic post-traumatic migraine headaches due to the collision.
As the case progressed, several motions were filed concerning expert testimonies. On January 31, 2023, the defendants sought to supplement their witness list to include Dr. Charles Bain and Dr. Kevin Greve. Dr. Bain was described as an accident reconstructionist and biomechanical engineer who would testify about the severity of the accident and its potential to cause injuries claimed by Leininger. Dr. Greve was listed as a clinical psychologist and neuropsychologist who would opine on Leininger's cognitive status and ongoing post-concussion syndrome.
Leininger filed multiple motions in limine to exclude these testimonies, arguing that Dr. Bain's methods were unreliable and that Dr. Greve's testimony was cumulative and irrelevant since he did not possess a medical degree. Despite these objections, the trial court allowed both experts to testify but restricted Dr. Bain from discussing medical specifics.
During closing arguments at trial, defense counsel referenced payments made by Leininger's attorney for her medical bills—a point Leininger argued should have been excluded under Louisiana’s collateral source rule which prevents tortfeasors from benefiting from plaintiffs' independent sources of compensation.
Ultimately, the jury awarded Leininger $35,000 for past medical expenses but nothing for future medical costs despite her claim for over $300,000 in total damages. Dissatisfied with this outcome and believing that improper admission of expert testimony influenced the jury's decision, Leininger appealed.
On appeal, it was found that the trial court failed to comply with procedural requirements when admitting expert testimonies without detailed findings of fact or reasons for judgment as mandated by Louisiana Code of Civil Procedure Article 1425(F). Additionally, it was determined that references to attorney-paid medical bills during closing arguments were improperly admitted under collateral source rules.
As a result of these findings, Judge Dale N. Atkins vacated the June 1, 2023 judgment rendered in accordance with the jury verdict and remanded the matter for a new trial.
Attorneys representing Michelle Leininger include Alicia M. Bendana from Lugenbuhl Wheaton Peck Rankin & Hubbard along with Jennifer E. Barriere and Lorin R. Scott from Holden Litigation PC among others admitted pro hac vice like Steven E Holden Laura J Grabouski Scott R Hunsaker Smita Gautam Tucker Ellis LLP while defendants are represented by Robert E Williams IV Sulzer & Williams LLC