Schulenberg v. BNSF Railway Co., 911 F.3d 1276 (10th Cir. Dec. 27, 2018)

In this negligence action against a railroad, a train engineer sought to recover for injuries allegedly caused by a train “bottoming out” while passing over rough track. The district court excluded the engineer’s expert witness on railroad track maintenance and inspection, then granted summary judgment in favor of the railroad.  The Tenth Circuit affirmed, holding that the lower court did not abuse its discretion in excluding the expert’s report and testimony because the expert’s opinions lacked any identifiable methodology or factual foundation.  Regardless of his expert’s ostensible expertise in the field, the engineer failed to identify, let alone defend, the basis of the expert’s opinions.