concluding the district court did not err when it excluded Kelley's testimony under Rule 702 because his "curriculum vitae did not specifically mention any underwriting experience, he had not worked in the insurance business for almost thirty years, and his proffered testimony was borderline legal opinion
Summary of this case from Salopek v. Zurich Am. Life Ins. Co.No. 95-35706.
September 9, 1996.
Appeal from D.Alaska.
AFFIRMED
concluding the district court did not err when it excluded Kelley's testimony under Rule 702 because his "curriculum vitae did not specifically mention any underwriting experience, he had not worked in the insurance business for almost thirty years, and his proffered testimony was borderline legal opinion
Summary of this case from Salopek v. Zurich Am. Life Ins. Co.rejecting an argument "the IRS failed to meet its burden of proof on the award of interest" in part because the IRS provided "detailed computer printouts and an accompanying explanation by an IRS expert in the field"
Summary of this case from United States v. ShearerFull title:Delta Airlines v. State Farm Fire and Cas. Co
Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Date published: Sep 9, 1996
Not one of Century's cases involve an insurer's duty to defend an administrative action under CERCLA, or even…
United States v. ShearerPlaintiff supports its calculation with the Declaration of Revenue Agent Nancy Yang, analyzing data from the…