On motion of any party who has engaged in a timely exchange of expert witness information, the court may grant leave to:
augment that party’s expert witness list and declaration by adding the name and address of any expert witness whom that party has subsequently retained; and/or
amend that party’s expert witness declaration with respect to the general substance of the testimony that an expert previously designated is expected to give.
(Code Civ. Proc., Sec. 2034.610(a).)
This motion shall be made a sufficient time in advance to permit the deposition of any expert to whom the motion relates to be taken before the discovery cut-off, unless exceptional circumstances exist. (Code Civ. Proc., Sec. 2034.610,(b).) The motion shall be accompanied by a meet and confer declaration. (Code Civ. Proc., Sec. 2034.610(c).)
Court's Considerations
The court shall grant leave to augment or amend an expert witness list only if all of the following conditions are satisfied:
The court has taken into account the extent to which the opposing party has relied on the list of expert witnesses.
The court has determined that any party opposing the motion will not be prejudiced in maintaining that party’s action or defense on the merits.
The court has determined either of the following:
The moving party would not in the exercise of reasonable diligence have determined to call that expert witness or have decided to offer the different or additional testimony of that expert witness.
The moving party failed to determine to call that expert witness, or to offer the different or additional testimony of that expert witness as a result of mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect, and the moving party has done both of the following:
Sought leave to augment or amend promptly after deciding to call the expert witness or to offer the different or additional testimony.
Promptly thereafter served a copy of the proposed expert witness information concerning the expert or the testimony described in Section 2034.260 on all other parties who have appeared in the action.
Leave to augment or amend is conditioned on the moving party making the expert available immediately for a deposition under Article 3 (commencing with Section 2034.410), and on any other terms as may be just, including, but not limited to, leave to any party opposing the motion to designate additional expert witnesses or to elicit additional opinions from those previously designated, a continuance of the trial for a reasonable period of time, and the awarding of costs and litigation expenses to any party opposing the motion.
(Code of Civ. Proc. Sec. 2034.620.)
Judicial Interpretation of Section 2034
The spirit of Code of Civil Procedure section 2034, though apparently not the letter of subdivision (j) itself, implies that a party who wishes to call at trial an expert who was not designated when expert witness information was exchanged and who is intended to take the place of a previously designated but now unavailable expert, must make a motion under subdivision (k) to augment that party's expert witness list to include the new expert. (Richaud v. Jennings (1993) 16 Cal.App.4th 81, 90-91.) The party cannot do nothing and then insist that the replacement expert can be called at trial on the ground that the party's failure to list the replacement expert when expert witness information was exchanged was not "unreasonable." (Id.) Nor can the party comply with the statute by unilaterally, without leave of court and at any time the party chooses, simply serving a so-called "supplemental" expert witness designation listing the new replacement expert. (Id.)
Other Circumstances for Augmentation
Augmentation of the expert witness designation has been allowed where the expert passed away before trial (see Richaud v. Jennings (1993) 16 Cal.App.4th 81, 89), as well as where the expert’s conclusions and deposition testimony were found to be unexpectedly detrimental to the party offering the expert (see Dickison v. Howen (1990) 220 Cal.App.3d 1471, 1478.)
Useful Resources for Augmentation of Expert Witness List
Superior Court of California
County of Los Angeles
Department 78
ROBERT VARTZAR et al.; Plaintiffs, vs. new star realty, inc., et al.; Defendants.
Case No.: BC721623
Hearing Date: February 25, 2020
[TENTATIVE] RULING RE:
Defendants new star realty and jenny s. nam’s motion to augment defendants’ expert witness list
Defendants New Star Realty and Jenny S. Nam’s Motion to Augment the Expert...
..ocedural history
Plaintiffs filed the Complaint on September 12, 2018, alleging one cause of action for general negligence.
On February 6, 2020, Defendants New Star and Jenny Nam filed the instant Motion to Augment Defendants’ Expert Witness List.
No Opposition has been filed.
Non-jury trial scheduled for March 9, 2020.
Discussion
Motion to Augment Discovery List
On motion of any party who...
Robert Clark, Plaintiff, v. Stephen G. Owen, et al., Defendants.
Case No.: BC599993
Hearing Date: October 9, 2018
[TENTATIVE] order RE:
motion to augment Plaintiff’s Expert witness list
Background
Plaintiff Robert Clark (“Plaintiff”) moves to augment Plaintiff’s expert witness list. Defendant Stephen G. Owens M.D. (“Defendant”) opposes the motion.
On May 30, 2017, Defendant and Plaintiffs e...
..ty who has engaged in a timely exchange of expert witness information, the court may grant leave to do either or both of the following:
(1) Augment that party’s expert witness list and declaration by adding the name and address of any expert witness whom that party has subsequently retained.
(2) Amend that party’s expert witness declaration with respect to the general substance of the testimon...
Defendant’s Motion for Leave to Augment Expert Witness Information.
On January 12, 2017, plaintiff filed an action against defendant for property damages and personal injury allegedly resulting from a motor vehicle accident. Trial was initially set for June 18, 2018. The trial date was vacated upon stipulation of the parties on October 16, 2017. At the CMC on November 20, 2017 the court ordered th...
..expert disclosure with a new accident reconstruction expert, otherwise the expert witness designations by the parties were considered closed absent a party bringing a motion to augment before the court. The trial is currently set to commence on June 10, 2019.
Defendant moves for leave to augment his expert witness list on the following grounds: defendant has satisfied the conditions required in o...
Nature of Proceedings: Motion to Compel Production; Motion to Augment, Amend or Reopen Expert. . .
Jennifer Cloud v. Student Transportation of America, Inc., et al., #16C01260, Judge Sterne
Hearing Date: May 15, 2017
Matters:
Motion to Compel Production of Documents from Plaintiff’s Retained Expert Witness, Alan Moelleken, M.D.
Motion to Augment, Amend, or Reopen Expert Witness Disclosure
...
..dent Transportation of America, Inc.’s motion to augment their expert witness list. Pursuant to CCP § 2034.620(d), the court orders that defendants may augment their witness list to designate a biomechanical expert witness and provide that witness’ expert witness declaration, on or before May 26, 2017. Plaintiff may submit a supplemental expert disclosure identifying any additional expert witness...
Hector De La Mora, Plaintiff, v. Vallarta Supermarkets, et al., Defendants.
Case No.: BC560187
Hearing Date: June 25, 2018
[TENTATIVE] order RE:
motion to augment Defendant’s Expert witness list
Background
Defendant Vallarta Food Enterprises, Inc. (“Defendant”) moves to augment Defendant’s expert witness list. Plaintiff Hector De La Mora (“Plaintiff”) opposes the motion. Defendant has not fi...
..ery as related to Plaintiff’s medical conditions. The current trial date is set for August 15, 2018.
Legal Standard
CCP § 2034.610(a) provides as follows:
On motion of any party who has engaged in a timely exchange of expert witness information, the court may grant leave to do either or both of the following:
(1) Augment that party’s expert witness list and declaration by adding the name and...
Megan Sherer, Plaintiff, v. Tony Kim, et al., Defendants.
Case No.: BC575864
Hearing Date: April 24, 2018
[TENTATIVE] order RE:
motion to augment Plaintiff’s Expert witness list
Background
Plaintiff Megan Sherer (“Plaintiff”) moves to augment Plaintiff’s expert witness list. Defendants Tony Kim, Suzan Jean Kim and Sarah Kocak (“Defendants”) oppose this motion on grounds that the designation...
..rdered that discovery was not continued “except as agreed upon by the parties.” At the February 23, 2018 hearing, the Court was informed that expert depositions were still being taken, and thus, the parties needed expert discovery to remain open as to the remaining depositions. The current trial date is set for July 16, 2018.
Plaintiff moves to augment Plaintiff’s expert designation to allow Pl...
PATRICIA A. BOYES, ESQ. [SBN: 244335]
ANTHONY L. PEREZ, ESQ. [SBN: 303045]
HARISH TANGRI, ESQ. [SBN: 325752]
BOYESLEGAL, APC
84 W. Santa Clara Street, Suite 550
San Jose, California 95113 1812
Tel: (408) 572 5665
Fax: (408) 572 5567
Attorneys for Plaintiff
CARLEY R. THOMPSON
Superior Court of California
County of Kern
Bakersfield Department 13
Hearing Date: 08/03/2020 MATHIEU VS BRADLEY BCV-17-101795
Honorable: David R. Lampe Clerk: V
Superior Court of California
County of Kern
Bakersfield Department 13
Hearing Date: 08/03/2020 MATHIEU VS BRADLEY BCV-17-101795
Honorable: David R. Lampe Clerk: V
Ike M. Kaludi, SBN 289576
Adam Nathaniel Arce, SBN 328732
CALIFORNIA TRIAL LAW GROUP, PC
828 San Pablo Ave., Suite 109
Albany, CA 94706
Telephone: (415) 967 4900
Facsimile: (415) 967 4901
Attorneys for Leeran Schwartz
SUPERIOR COU
Co mem NDA HY FWY
N NN NN Se Be ee Be ee Be ee
BNRFERRBKRKBSSSEWVARDEBHRAS
Ike M. Kaludi, SBN 289576
Adam Nathaniel Arce, SBN 328732
CALIFORNIA TRIAL LAW GROUP, PC San Francisco County Surerior Court
828 San Pablo Ave., Suite 109
Albany, CA 94706 JUN 2 6 2020
Telephone: (415) 967-4900
Facsimile: (415) 967-4901 CLERK OF THE COURT
Attorneys for Leeran Schwartz BY a
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA (UNLIMITED)
COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO
LEERAN SCHWARTZ, CASE NO. CGC-18-569157
Plai
1 Ike M. Kaludi, SBN 289576
Adam Nathaniel Arce, SBN 328732
2 CALIFORNIA TRIAL LAW GROUP, PC
828 San Pablo Ave., Suite 109
3 Albany, CA 94706
Telephone: (415) 967-4900
4 Facsimile: (415) 967-4901
5 Attorneys for Leeran Schwartz
6
S
‘BREMER WHYTE BROWN &
(O'MEARA LLP
21216 Burbank Bh
‘Suite 500,
Woodland Hills, CA 91967
(818) 712-9800
10
in
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
va,
BREMER WHYTE BROWN & O’MEARA LLP
John O’Meara, State Bar No. 144416
[email protected]
Eileen Gaisford, State Bar No. 193149
[email protected]
Cecilia K. Leineweber, State Bar No. 278605
[email protected]
21215 Burbank Boulevard
Suite 500
Woodland Hills, California 91367
Telephone: (818) 712-9800
Fa
Robert T. Bergsten, Esq., SBN 167129
Benjamin L. Goldstein, Esq., SBN 280924
HOSP, GILBERT & BERGSTEN
A Law Corporation
301 North Lake Avenue, Suite 410
Pasadena, CA 91101
(626) 792 2400, Fax: (626) 356
wo Oo ND WH FF WN
Ny YY YN N BoB Be Be eB Re eB Re eB
SRRRPBSBEBSSeF RW RAREBHRAS
D
al
San Francisee County Suoerior Court
JUN 1 6 2020
CLE| F COURT
BY: ee Ae 2
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA Deputy Clerk
COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO
Case No. CGC — 18-568734
Mint Development., LLC.,
Plaintiff,
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO
VS. AUGMENT EXPERT DISCLOSURE
Aspen American Insurance Co., et al.,
Defendants.
I heard argument today on Mint’s motion to augment its expert witness disclosure. I had
pro
Philip L. Pillsbury, Jr. (SBN 72261)
William A. Aspinwall (SBN 308919)
PILLSBURY & COLEMAN, LLP
The Pillsbury & Coleman Building
100 Green Street
San Francisco, CA 94111
Telephone:
[email protected][email protected]
Philip L. Pillsbury, Jr. (SBN 72261)
William A. Aspinwall (SBN 308919)
PILLSBURY & COLEMAN, LLP
The Pillsbury & Coleman Building
100 Green Street
San Francisco, CA 94111
Telephone:
[email protected][email protected]
THOMAS W. J. PURTELL, ESQ. (SBN 229961)
JAMES O’BRIEN, ESQ. (SNB170035)
THE LAW OFFICES OF THOMAS W. J. PURTELL
534 Pacific Ave., Suite 200
San Francisco, CA 94133
Telephone: (415)
Facsimile: (415)
Email: [email protected] law.com
135-7583
Mark R. Mittelman (SBN 96598)
Paul A. Kanter (SBN 194596)
LAW OFFICES OF MARK R, MITTRILMAN
A Professional Corporation
575 Lennon Lane, Suile 150
Walnut Creck, California 94598
Felephone: (925) 256-0677
Facsimile: (925} 256-0679
Attorneys for Defendant
Ho Yong Chong dba Joomak
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO
PHUONG HOANG, Case No, CGC-18-569173
Plaintiff, DISCOVERY MOTION
vs. DECLARATION OF PAUL A. KANTER
IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT HO
JOOMAK, a comm
SPINELLI, DONALD & NOTT
A Professional Corporation SUPER/OR COURT OF CALIFORNIA
ROSS R. NOTT (SBN: 172235) UNTY OF PLACE
RYAN I.ICHINAGA (SBN: 321185)
601 University Avenue, Suite 225 a
Kevin L. Elder, State Bar #148034
PENNEY & ASSOCIATES
6536 Lonetree Boulevard JAN 16 2020
Rocklin, CA 95765 oo
Telephone: (916) 786-7662 Bxanutive t R Clerk
_
oO mI DH BF WN
mb N YN NN NR NY DN Bee Be Be Be Be Be Be ew
oa AA FF BH F&F SO we I DH FF WN
PEGGY CHANG, ESQ. (SBN #144364)
BECKMAN, FELLER & CHANG PC
2298 Durant Avenue
Berkeley, California 94704
Telephone: (510) 548-7474
Facsimile: (510) 548-7488
Attorneys for Defendants
STEVE DROSOS, MARGO DROSOS,
PHILIP CHIAPPARI, ANNETTE
CHIAPPARI and C, COURNALE & CO., INC.
F
San Francisco County Suoerior Court
JAN X 8 2020
CLERK OF THE COURT
BY: Deyuty clerk
‘SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CA
é
o
0
g
>
3
2
B
A Professional Law Corporation
www.bvlawsf.com
nA Bw
on
co
Ryan J. Vlasak (SBN 241581)
Betzy Bras-Gonzalez (SBN 328716)
BRACAMONTES & VLASAK, P.C.
220 Montgomery Street, Suite 870
San Francisco, CA 94104
Phone: (415) 835-6777
Fax: (415) 835-6780
Attorneys for Plaintiff Susan Chen
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO
UNLIMITED JURISDICTION
SUSAN CHEN,
Plaintiff,
VS.
STEVE DROSOS, individually and as trustee of
th
_
oO mI DH BF WN
mb N YN NN NR NY DN Bee Be Be Be Be Be Be ew
oa AA FF BH F&F SO we I DH FF WN
PEGGY CHANG, ESQ. (SBN #144364)
BECKMAN, FELLER & CHANG PC
2298 Durant Avenue
Berkeley, California 94704
Telephone: (510) 548-7474
Facsimile: (510) 548-7488
Attorneys for Defendants
STEVE DROSOS, MARGO DROSOS,
PHILIP CHIAPPARI, ANNETTE
CHIAPPARI and C, COURNALE & CO., INC.
F
San Francisco County Suoerior Court
JAN X 8 2020
CLERK OF THE COURT
BY: Deyuty clerk
‘SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CA
N
XY DA wu Bw
10
ul
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PEGGY CHANG, ESQ. (SBN #144364)
BECKMAN, FELLER & CHANG PC
2298 Durant Avenue
Berkeley, California 94704
Telephone: (510) 548-7474
Facsimile: (510) 548-7488
Attorneys for Defendants
STEVE DROSOS, MARGO DROSOS,
PHILIP CHIAPPARI, ANNETTE
CHIAPPARI and C. COURNALE & CO., INC.
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO - UNLIMITED JURISDICTION
SUSAN CHEN, Case No.: CGC-19-573470
Plaintiff,
NO
a ee a
~Y» N YN YB YB N NR NY NY Be Be we ewe ee ee =
e2e2rA Ama &F OHH SF Ce A AQAaE BH ES
PEGGY CHANG, ESQ. (#144364)
BECKMAN, FELLER & CHANG PC
2298 Durant Avenue
Berkeley, California 94704
Telephone: | (510) 548-7474
Facsimile: (510) 548-7488
Email: [email protected]
Attorneys for Defendants
STEVE DROSOS, MARGO DROSOS,
PHILIP CHIAPPARI, ANNETTE
CHIAPPARI and C. COURNALE & CO., INC.
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO - UNLIMITED JURISDICTION
SUSAN CHE
1 Edward R. Hugo [Bar No. 124839]
Thomas W. Remillard [Bar No. 251567]
2 HUGO PARKER, LLP
240 Stockton Street, 8th Floor
3 San Francisco, CA 94111098
Telephone: (415) 808-0300
4 Facsimile: (415) 808-0333
Email: [email protected]
5
Attorneys for Defendant
