Northern Natural Gas Co. v. Beech Aircraft Corp., 41843

• Decision Date: 06 February 1979
• Docket Number: No. 41843,41843
• Citation: 202 Neb. 300,275 N.W.2d 77
• Parties: NORTHERN NATURAL GAS COMPANY, a corporation, Appellant, v. BEECH AIRCRAFT CORPORATION, a corporation, Appellee.
• Court: Nebraska Supreme Court

Page 77

275 N.W.2d 77

202 Neb. 300

NORTHERN NATURAL GAS COMPANY, a corporation, Appellant, v. BEECH AIRCRAFT CORPORATION, a corporation, Appellee.

No. 41843.

Supreme Court of Nebraska.

Feb. 6, 1979.

Syllabus by the Court

1. In an appropriate case an expert may render an opinion without first disclosing the underlying data upon which the opinion is based.

2. An expert can render an opinion in an appropriate case in response to a direct question and is not required to have a hypothetical question presented to him.

3. Before an expert opinion can be rendered it must be shown that such an opinion is of a scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge which would assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue, and that the witness qualifies as such expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education.

4. A trial court may either on its own motion or in response to an objection require an expert to disclose the underlying facts or data upon which the opinion is to be based before permitting the expert to render his opinion.

5. The action of the trial court, in either requesting an expert witness to disclose the underlying data or information upon which his opinion is based or refusing such a request, will not be disturbed on appeal in the absence of a showing that the trial court abused its discretion.

6. If an expert witness desires to render an opinion without first disclosing the underlying data or information upon which the opinion is based, he must first establish by competent evidence that the matter involved in the opinion is of such nature that experts within the specific field could render such an opinion; and likewise that experts within the specific field would rely upon the data or information relied upon by the testifying expert in rendering the opinion.

John A. Rickerson, Omaha, for appellant.

Karl F. Schmidt of Morrison, Hecker, Curtis, Kuder & Parrish, Kansas City, Mo., Robert G. Fraser of Fraser, Stryker, Veach, Vaughn, Meusey, Olson & Boyer, P. C., Omaha, for appellee.

Heard before KRIVOSHA, C. J., McCOWN, CLINTON and BRODKEY, JJ., and STANLEY, District Judge.

KRIVOSHA, Chief Justice.

This is an action for damages based upon the appellant's theory that the appellee had negligently designed and manufactured an aircraft as set out in the petition. At the close of the appellant's case the appellee moved for a directed verdict which was sustained by the trial court. The action was thereupon dismissed and appeal taken to this court. We concur with the action of the trial court in granting the motion and directing a verdict, and accordingly we affirm.

The appellant was the owner of a Beechcraft King Air aircraft which crashed near Kirksville, Missouri, on March 11, 1966. The accident occurred at approximately 12:14 p. m. Just prior to the accident the aircraft was cruising at 16,000 feet when the right engine flamed out and shortly afterwards the left engine flamed out. The pilot testified he used the restart procedure, but was unable to get either of the two engines started. The loss of power necessitated an emergency landing which totally destroyed the aircraft.

In its fourth amended petition appellant alleged that the appellee had negligently designed and manufactured the aircraft with regard to certain inlet guide vanes. Because of the allegedly faulty design, ice was caused to form which in turn blocked the entrance of air and caused the engines to stop.

At trial the appellant called several witnesses, including the pilot, who described the events which occurred from the time the plane took off on March 11, 1966, from Roanoke, Virginia, until the time of the crash near Kirksville, Missouri.

Without objection appellant offered in evidence exhibit 25 which consisted of surface weather observations taken by the National Weather Records Center on March 11, 1966, at Roanoke, Virginia; Bluefield, West Virginia; Huntington, West Virginia; Lexington, Kentucky; Louisville, Kentucky; Bloomington, Indiana; Matton, Illinois; Springfield, Illinois; Quincy, Illinois; Kirksville, Missouri; Terre Haute, Indiana; and Columbia, Missouri. No witness, however, up to that point, had testified as to the design of the aircraft or in any manner which tied the crash of the aircraft to the alleged defective design of the inlet guide vanes.

As a matter of fact, the pilot testified that just before the flame outs occurred he was flying at 16,000 feet in clear air and 7,000 to 8,000 feet above any clouds. He further testified there was no indication of icing conditions nor was there any visible moisture. In his opinion the weather was not a factor in the accident.

Appellant then called to the stand one W. Stewart Roberts who testified he was an engine failure investigating engineer. Through a series of questions the witness was qualified as a mechanical engineer with knowledge about engines. He did acknowledge he was not a meteorologist and had not taken any courses in meteorology. During an offer of proof, Roberts testified that in his senior year at M.I.T. he had majored in air conditioning and refrigeration from which he believed he had gained his knowledge concerning humidity.

Without objection, exhibits 34 and 35 were then offered and received in evidence. Exhibit 34 was a certified true copy of the records on file in the National Climatic Center, Asheville, North Carolina, taken on March 11, 1966, at 6 o'clock in the morning and 5 o'clock in the evening. The records consisted of a constant pressure chart for Columbia, Missouri, and a constant pressure chart which covered a wider area. The exhibit also contained dry bulb and dew point measurements taken at an altitude of 18,000 feet over Omaha, Nebraska; Topeka, Kansas; Columbia, Missouri; and Peoria, Illinois, at 6 o'clock in the morning and 6 o'clock in the evening on March 11, 1966. The closest point to the scene of the crash recorded by the exhibit was Columbia, Missouri, more than 100 miles from the crash scene. Likewise, the recordings were taken 6 hours before or 6 hours after the crash and at an altitude of at least 2,000 feet higher than the altitude at which the plane was flying when the flame outs occurred. Exhibit 35 was never fully explained, but appears to be radar tracings for the United States taken on March 11, 1966. After several further questions concerning temperatures, the trial court declared a recess and a meeting was held on the record out of...