Summary
describing metallurgist's testimony that was “well within his metallurgical expertise” when he “identified wear on the ratchet wheel of the brake that showed repeated tip-on-tip engagement rather than the proper engagement”
Summary of this case from Pyramid Techs., Inc. v. Hartford Cas. Ins. Co.Opinion
No. 99-15185.
Argued and Submitted May 1, 2000.
Filed December 3, 2002. Amended July 3, 2003.
Andrew L. Frey (argued), Mayer, Brown Platt, New York, NY. On the brief were Evan M. Tager, Miriam R. Nemetz, Mayer, Brown, Rowe, Maw, LLP, Washington, DC, W. Chris Wicker, Woodburn Wedge, Reno, NV, for defendants-appellants.
Shanin Specter (argued), Kline Specter, P.C., Philadelphia, PA, Don Nomura, Laxalt Nomura, LTD., Reno, NV, for the plaintiffs-appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Nevada; David Warner Hagen, District Judge, Presiding. D.C. No. CV-95-00279-DWH.
ORDER
The majority opinion filed on December 3, 2002, is amended as follows.
At page 18, lines 19-21 of the slip opinion, delete the sentence "We need not decide whether the district court abused its discretion in allowing the opinion into evidence in this case, because we reverse on other grounds." Also, delete footnote 26, referred to at the end of that sentence. Substitute the sentence, "Nevertheless, we cannot say that the district judge abused his discretion in allowing the opinion into evidence in this case."
With these amendments, the petition for rehearing is denied. No further petitions for rehearing may be filed.