The court opines that it is not clear as to what qualifies MacMaster to opine on the reasonableness of fees in fields that he has not done billing for in over twenty five years. In addition, Home Depot points out that MacMaster’s calculations are based on CPT codes, which he interpreted based on his training and experience. Home Depot argues that MacMaster should be allowed to testify on these latter matters because he has been involved in coding an billing practices related to the treatment he provides. The court also states that MacMaster claims that he has not billed as to neurology, neurosurgery, a nesthesiology, chiropractic medicine, and as a pain specialist ever or not within twenty years. Ramos has filed a motion to exclude this expert from testifying.ĭiscussion: Ramos argues that MacMaster’s testimony should be excluded for three reasons: 1) His opinions are not relevant, unreliable, and confusing to the jury 2) He is not qualified to testify on the necessity of medical bills that are in areas outside of his expertise 3) His counter-affidavit is conclusory.įirst, the court notes that MacMaster is an orthopedic surgeon who has been in practice for over forty years. Benzel MacMaster to provide expert testimony. In order to prove their case, The Home Depot has hired Orthopedic Surgery Expert Witness Dr. Ramos states that she slipped on an unidentified substance on the floor and sustained severe injuries to her entire body. The plaintiff, an employee at The Home Depot, claims that she was injured while she was walking to back of the gardening department. The Home Depot Inc – United States District Court – Northern District of Texas – March 1st, 2022) involves a personal injury claim. 6Summary: Orthopedic Surgery Expert Witness testimony is allowed in part, even though the plaintiff argued that the expert was not qualified as he has not done billing in certain practices for over 25 years.įacts: This case ( Ramos v.
0 kommentar(er)
