In Nevada, an expert was to testify in the Las Vegas Sun’s antitrust lawsuit against the Las Vegas Review-Journal. His testimony was to be on behalf of the defendant concerning a breach of provisions in a joint operating agreement. The plaintiff argued that the expert’s testimony is inadmissible because it is unreliable under Daubert and it offers improper legal opinion.

Off limits: The district court ruled that the expert may not offer any testimony that interprets provisions of the agreement or makes a conclusion about whether the plaintiff breached it. He also may not opine on the plaintiff’s intent with respect to certain matters. These subjects are related to either legal conclusions or intent, neither of which are admissible as expert testimony. However, the district court disagreed that the expert’s testimony was unreliable under Daubert, so that part of the motion was denied. The court also limited some discovery in the case.

The case is Las Vegas Sun, Inc. v. Adelson, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 59414; 2024 WL 1377275, and a case analysis and full court opinion are on the BVLaw platform.