284 motioninopposition combine

Page 1

Case: 1:11-cv-00103-GHD-DAS Doc #: 284 Filed: 10/25/13 1 of 19 PageID #: 3985

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI EASTERN DIVISION KMART CORPORATION VS.

PLAINTIFF CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:11-CV-103-GHD-DAS

THE KROGER CO., E&A SOUTHEAST LIMITED PARTNERSHIP; FULTON IMPROVEMENTS LLC; THE KANSAS CITY SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY; CITY OF CORINTH; THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; JOHN DOE; AND ABC CORPORATION

DEFENDANTS

______________________________________________________________________________ DEFENDANT THE KANSAS CITY SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY’S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF’S DAUBERT MOTION TO EXCLUDE THE TESTIMONY OF KELLY BLAKE MENDROP ______________________________________________________________________________ The Kansas City Southern Railway Company (“KCSR”) hereby opposes Plaintiff Kmart Corporation’s Daubert motion [Doc 261] to exclude the testimony of KCSR’s hydrologist expert Blake Mendrop. Plaintiff’s assertions that Mendrop’s opinions are based on insufficient, outdated, and unreliable data are gross mischaracterizations of Mendrop’s deposition testimony, are not based on any other expert’s testimony (but instead are just lawyer’s arguments), and are demonstrably false as indicated by the Affidavit of Blake Mendrop (Exhibit A hereto) and the portions of Mendrop’s deposition that Plaintiff omitted. The crux of Plaintiff’s argument is that Mendrop modeled the May 2, 2010 flood event using “thirty year old” data. This assertion is not supported by any competent expert testimony, and is wrong and a red herring. As shown herein, consistent with engineering standards, Mendrop used 1981 Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) model data as a starting 1


Turn static files into dynamic content formats.

Create a flipbook
Issuu converts static files into: digital portfolios, online yearbooks, online catalogs, digital photo albums and more. Sign up and create your flipbook.
284 motioninopposition combine by Milton Sandy - Issuu