Welding Trial Plaintiff Moves to Exclude His Expert's 'Proper' Analysis Definition

CLEVELAND - The plaintiff in a welding fume case scheduled for trial in November has asked the trial court to prevent defendants from repeating "argumentative questions" asked at deposition about whether the expert conducted a "proper" analysis of ephedrone studies relating to manganism. Street v. Lincoln Electric, et al., No. 1:06-cv-17026 [In re: Welding Fume Products Liability Litigation, MDL No. 1535] (N.D. Ohio).

Richard Street contends that neurologist Juan Sanchez-Ramos' statements as to whether his analysis of particular studies cited by defendants' was "proper" or "adequate" is irrelevant and prejudicial.

The statements at issue were made during an Aug. 24 …