The plaintiff filed objections to the Magistrate’s recommendation for granting summary judgment, arguing that his expert’s affidavit was enough to create an issue as to material fact.
The court began its analysis and stated that its review of objections to a magistrate’s decision are de novo. The issue at heart was the plaintiff’s reliance on the Boyd case to support his claim that the affidavit of his expert, Captain Bulger, established an issue of fact. The court found that the affidavit only “bolstered” was had been established in that decision. According to the court, the plaintiff had not cited anything other than circumstantial evidence. Consequently, the recommendation was affirmed.
Click here to read Asbestos Case Tracker’s summary of the Magistrate’s decision.