FFE Transportation Services, Inc. v. Fulgham

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that trial court’s determination of need for expert testimony to prove negligence claim is legal determination reviewed without deference
• holding that expert testimony was necessary in establishing applicable standard of care on matters not within the general experience and common understanding of laypersons
• concluding that “de novo is the appropriate standard of review” applicable to a “trial court’s determination regarding whether expert testimony was required” and noting that this “conclusion is consistent with those of other state supreme courts”
• explaining that whether a particular matter requires expert testimony is a question of law reviewed de novo
• holding expert testimony necessary because jurors do not ″know what the standard of care is for the inspection and maintenance of the upper coupler assembly, kingpin, and base rail of a refrigerated trailer″
• “A company that gratuitously furnishes a product solely to accomplish its own business purposes is liable for negligence but not strict liability.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).