Mazda Motor Corporation v. Jon Hurst and Barbara Hurst, as Parents of Natalie J. Hurst, and Sydney McLemore

Summary

The court affirmed the admission of the plaintiffs' expert testimony, holding that the testimony was based on technical knowledge and experience rather than scientific methodology subject to the heightened requirements of Rule 702(b). It also affirmed the refusal to instruct the jury on contributory negligence, but held that the evidence did not support Sydney's wantonness claim or her punitive-damages award. The court preserved Sydney's compensatory AEMLD award and affirmed the Hursts' wrongful-death award, remanding for proceedings consistent with those rulings.