7th Circuit Upholds Experts' Estimates of Drywall Workers' Rates, Productivity
In a suit involving pension benefits, a Seventh Circuit panel has upheld the experience-based testimony of experts who estimated the rates and productivity of drywall workers. See Trs. of the Chicago Painters & Decorators Pension v. Royal Int'l Drywall & Decorating, Inc., No. 06-2367 (7th Cir. July 3, 2007) (Bauer, Manion, & Rovner, JJ.).
Labels: 7th Circuit
posted by pn at 4:30 AM
2 Comments:
Seems like Royal was trying to run an end-round on the issue of time-sheets. From what I can tell, the argument is -- the time-sheets shouldn’t have been thrown out because they were time-sheets: “We were required to keep them, and we did, so you aren’t allowed to question them.” This is my first time here, though, so I’m curious: does Daubert also apply in criminal cases, or is it only a civil standard? I know of an important criminal trial in Arkansas where there has been some real question as to whether “experts” were allowed to testify, and whether those who did were actually “experts.” The trial took place in the mid-90s, but appeals are ongoing, and the case has attracted a lot of national attention. Essentially, experts on “Satanism” (re: alarmists) were allowed to testify, while experts on “psychology” were not. Would this be a reasonable grounds for appeal?
Questions:
1. Was it made clear to Royal that they should pay the employees by hour and not by piece?
2. If the timesheet of Royal is wrong who has the correct timesheet and how can this be proven to be the right one?
Post a Comment
<< Home