Gold Creek Condominium-Phase I Association of Apartment Owners v. State Farm Fire and Casualty Company

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA GOLD CREEK CONDOMINIUM-PHASE CASE NO. 20-5690 RJB 11 I ASSOCIATION OF APARTMENTS OWNERS, a Washington non-profit ORDER GRANTING, IN PART, 12 corporation, AND DENYING, IN PART, DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS TO 13 Plaintiff, EXCLUDE TESTIMONY OF v. KEITH SOLTNER AND SETTING 14 DAUBERT HEARING STATE FARM FIRE AND CASUALTY 15 COMPANY, an Illinois corporation; ST. PAUL FIRE AND MARINE INSURANCE 16 COMPANY, a Connecticut company, THE AETNA CASUALTY AND SURETY 17 COMPANY, a Connecticut Company; TRAVELERS CASUALTY AND 18 SURETY COMPANY, a Connecticut Company; AETNA CASUALTY AND 19 SURETY COMPANY OF ILLINOIS, a Connecticut Company; TRAVERLERS 20 CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA, a Connecticut company; 21 and DOE INSURANCE COMPANIES 1- 10, Defendants.

1 This matter comes before the Court on Travelers Defendants’ Motion to Exclude Testimony of Keith Soltner (Dkt. 63) as joined in by Defendant State Farm (Dkt. 65). The Court is familiar with all documents at issue.

4 The motion (Dkts. 63 and 65) should be denied, in part, as to all paragraphs numbered 1 to 35 and 44 to 54 and the first three sentences of paragraph 6, in the Declaration of Keith Soltner in Support of Motion for Partial Summary Judgment Against the Travelers Defendants (Dkt. 52) (said Declaration appears to set forth Mr. Soltner’s opinions on the issues at hand, by numbered paragraphs and are used herein to guide this opinion). Similarly, the motion should be denied, in part, as to all paragraphs numbered 1 to 35 and 44 to 52 and the first three sentences of paragraph 6, in the Declaration of Keith Soltner in Support of Motion for Partial Summary Judgment Against State Farm (Dkt. 49). Said paragraphs are consistent with the requirements of Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharm., Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993), Kumho Tire Co., Ltd. v. Carmichael, 526 U.S. 137 (1999), and Rules of Evidence 701 and 702, and need no further discussion here.

14 Defendants’ Motion requested, alternatively, a hearing under “Daubert and its progeny,” and it appears to the Court appropriate to grant the motion (Dkts. 63 and 65) in part, for a “Daubert and its progeny” hearing in regard to the opinions listed in paragraphs 36 through 43, and the last three sentences of paragraph 6, of Mr. Soltner’s Declarations (Dkts. 52 and 49) to determine the admissibility of Mr. Soltner’s opinions regarding the timing of the commencement and duration of the damage to Gold Creek Condominiums.

20 Said Daubert hearing is hereby set at 9:30 a.m. on Thursday, June 23, 2022 in Courtroom A at the United States Courthouse, 1717 Pacific Avenue, Tacoma WA 98402.

22 IT IS SO ORDERED.

1 The Clerk is directed to send uncertified copies of this Order to all counsel of record and to any party appearing pro se at said party’s last known address.

3 Dated this 14th day of June, 2022.

4 A ROBERT J. BRYAN United States District Judge