"Daubert Hearing" For Libertad Act Lawsuit Against Cruise Lines- Challenging Expert Opinions And Valuing Damages
/On 25 January 2022 there was a “Daubert Hearing” before a Federal Magistrate in HAVANA DOCKS CORPORATION VS. CARNIVAL CORPORATION D/B/A/ CARNIVAL CRUISE LINES. The primary question was for the Federal Magistrate (a judge who is appointed for an eight-year term by vote of the District Court Justices) to determine if experts used by the plaintiff and the defendant met the “Daubert Standard.”
There are two Federal Magistrates for the four Title III of the Cuban Liberty and Democratic Solidarity Act of 1996 (known as “Libertad Act”) filed by Havana Docks Corporation. The reason is one Federal Magistrate had a conflict with connectivity to a law firm participating in the four lawsuits.
The Federal Magistrate presides at the hearing, listens to the arguments, asks questions, reads the filings, and then writes a report and submits recommendations to the presiding District Court Judge who will then enter a decision. Plaintiff and Defendant may appeal the decision of the District Court Judge.
The District Court Judge has yet to rule on a Defendant Motion for Summary Judgement. Plaintiffs are seeking a trial by jury. The trial is scheduled for May 2022.
Daubert Standard
West Law: This is the standard used by a trial judge to assess whether an expert witness’s scientific testimony is based on scientifically valid reasoning that which can properly be applied to the facts at issue. This standard comes from the Supreme Court case, Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993). Under the Daubert standard, the factors that may be considered in determining whether the methodology is valid are: (1) whether the theory or technique in question can be and has been tested; (2) whether it has been subjected to peer review and publication; (3) its known or potential error rate; (4)the existence and maintenance of standards controlling its operation; and (5) whether it has attracted widespread acceptance within a relevant scientific community. The Daubert standard is the test currently used in the federal courts and some state courts. In the federal court system, it replaced the Frye standard, which is still used in some states.
HAVANA DOCKS CORPORATION VS. CARNIVAL CORPORATION D/B/A/ CARNIVAL CRUISE LINES [1:19-cv-21724; Southern Florida District]
Colson Hicks Eidson, P.A. (plaintiff)
Margol & Margol, P.A. (plaintiff)
Jones Walker (defendant)
Boies Schiller Flexner LLP (defendant)
Akerman (defendant)
Court Filing Document Links:
Notice Of Filing Defendants’ Omnibus Daubert Hearing Presentation
International Claims Settlement Act of 1949
“The Chorzow Factory case is a first of its kind dispute that arose between Germany and Poland before the erstwhile Permanent Court of International Justice that involved the issue of paying reparation by Poland to Germany for having breached an agreement entered between them. After the first world war, a bipartite agreement was entered wherein the control of Upper Silesia area was transferred by Germany to Poland on the condition that Poland would not forfeit any property of Germany. However, Poland in breach of the agreement sold two German factories located in
that area.” LINK
HAVANA DOCKS CORPORATION V. NORWEGIAN CRUISE LINE HOLDINGS, LTD. [1:19-cv-23591; Southern Florida District]
Colson Hicks Eidson, P.A. (plaintiff)
Margol & Margol, P.A. (plaintiff)
Hogan Lovells US LLP (defendant)
HAVANA DOCKS CORPORATION VS. ROYAL CARIBBEAN CRUISES, LTD. [1:19-cv-23590; Southern Florida District]
Colson Hicks Eidson, P.A. (plaintiff)
Margol & Margol, P.A. (plaintiff)
Holland & Knight (defendant)
HAVANA DOCKS CORPORATION V. MSC CRUISES SA CO, AND MSC CRUISES (USA) INC. [1:19-cv-23588; Southern Florida District]
Colson Hicks Eidson, P.A. (plaintiff)
Margol & Margol, P.A. (plaintiff)
Venable (defendant)
