Free Motion in Limine - District Court of Colorado - Colorado

Case 1:01-cv-02089-MSK-CBS

Document 209

Filed 02/22/2006

Page 1 of 4

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action No. 01-cv-2089-MSK-CBS DEAN A. BRAMLET, M.D., Plaintiff, v. ASPEN VALLEY HOSPITAL DISTRICT, Defendant. ______________________________________________________________________________ JOINT MOTION UNDER FED. R. EVID. 702 AND MOTION FOR LEAVE FOR THE EXPERTS TO TESTIFY TELEPHONICALLY ______________________________________________________________________________ The parties, through their undersigned counsel, hereby request a determination of the admissibility of opinion testimony from Defendant's expert witness, Diane W. DeWitt, Ph.D., ABVE, ABPP. Counsel have discussed the issues raised herein on at least four separate

occasions in an attempt to narrow the issues and the opinions of the expert. The following represents that position of the parties after these discussions. Opinion 1 Plaintiff believes Dr. DeWitt's opinion is as follows: In my professional experience as a vocational expert and psychologist, with a reasonable degree of professional certainty, Plaintiff's actions when he relocated to Aspen Valley, Colorado, in 1998, to live and practice medicine, were not reasonable. Defendant believes Dr. DeWitt's opinion is as follows: In my professional experience as a vocational expert and psychologist, with a reasonable degree of professional certainty,

Case 1:01-cv-02089-MSK-CBS

Document 209

Filed 02/22/2006

Page 2 of 4

Plaintiff's actions when he relocated to Aspen Valley, Colorado, in 1998, to live and practice medicine, were not reasonable, because he demonstrated no foresight, and he did not weigh the meaning of important vocational, business, and professional information. He also did not

acquire an understanding or appreciation of the local norms and culture, and he displayed a range of unacceptable professional and vocational interpersonal behaviors. Plaintiff's Objection to Opinion 1 Plaintiff believes that Dr. DeWitt's opinion is not the product of reliable methods or principles and is based upon insufficient facts and data as she never even met the Plaintiff. Dr. DeWitt's methods violate The American Psychological Association ("APA") Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct and the Specialty Guidelines for Forensic Psychologists endorsed by the American Academy of Forensic Psychology. Opinion 2 Plaintiff believes Dr. DeWitt's opinion is as follows: In my professional experience as a vocational expert and psychologist, with a reasonable degree of professional certainty, Plaintiff's actions when he returned to Florida in 2000, to live and practice medicine, were not reasonable. Defendant believes Dr. DeWitt's opinion is as follows: In my professional experience as a vocational expert and psychologist, with a reasonable degree of professional certainty, Plaintiff's actions when he returned to Florida in 2000, to live and practice medicine, were not reasonable, because, again, he acted impulsively without a well worked out plan for such a large professional and personal transition. He did not employ recruiters or cast his net widely so that he would be considered for a variety of openings. He also continued to not keep records so he was unable, or unwilling, to provide the information needed to be granted privileges. He seems

-2-

Case 1:01-cv-02089-MSK-CBS

Document 209

Filed 02/22/2006

Page 3 of 4

to be engaging in the same vocational and interpersonal behaviors that resulted in failure in Colorado, and which may likely have been at the core of what led to his termination at the Heart Institute practice. Plaintiff's Objection to Opinion 2 Dr. DeWitt's opinion is not the product of reliable methods or principles and is based upon insufficient facts and data. Dr. DeWitt's methods violate acceptable standards for forensic evaluations, and her opinions are based on insufficient facts and data as she never even met the Plaintiff. Opinion 3 Plaintiff believes Dr. DeWitt's opinion is as follows: In my professional experience as a vocational expert and psychologist, with a reasonable degree of professional certainty, Plaintiff did not make reasonable efforts to mitigate his alleged damages. Dr. Bramlet has demonstrated a poor level of vocational interpersonal skills and comprehension of what is expected of him by his peers and other key decision makers in the medical world. He has not demonstrated any proficiency at finding suitable employment. Defendant believes Dr. DeWitt's opinion is as follows: Plaintiff believes Dr. DeWitt's opinion is as follows: In my professional experience as a vocational expert and psychologist, with a reasonable degree of professional certainty, Plaintiff did not make reasonable efforts to mitigate his alleged damages. Dr. Bramlet has demonstrated a poor level of vocational

interpersonal skills and comprehension of what is expected of him by his peers and other key decision makers in the medical world. He has not demonstrated any proficiency at finding suitable employment. He has not sought out professional help of any kind, from vocational

-3-

Case 1:01-cv-02089-MSK-CBS

Document 209

Filed 02/22/2006

Page 4 of 4

rehabilitation professionals to psychotherapists, from outplacement professionals to recruiters, from hospital human resources to any other providers. Plaintiff's Objection to Opinion 3 Dr. DeWitt's opinion is not the product of reliable methods or principles and is based upon insufficient facts and data. Dr. DeWitt's methods violate acceptable standards for forensic evaluations, and her opinions are based on insufficient facts and data as she did not actually evaluate the Plaintiff. Time Requested for Hearing The parties anticipate that the admissibility of these three opinions can be determined in a 4 hour hearing (two hours per side). The parties request that Dr. DeWitt, who resides in Bellevue, Washington, and Plaintiff's vocational expert, Dr. Michael Shahnasarian, who resides in Tampa, Florida, be permitted to testify telephonically at the hearing, to minimize the costs and expenses. LEAVENWORTH & KARP, P.C. s/ Sander N. Karp Sander N. Karp 201 14th Street, Suite 200 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Tel. 970.945.2261 [email protected] Attorneys for Plaintiff Ford & Harrison, LLP s/ Colleen Rea_________________ Colleen Rea, Esq. 1675 Broadway, Suite 2150 Denver, CO 80202 [email protected] Attorneys for Defendant

By:

By:

-4-