Augmentation of Expert Witness List in California

What Is an Augmentation of Expert Witness List?

Motion Requirements

On motion of any party who has engaged in a timely exchange of expert witness information, the court may grant leave to:

  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; and/or
  2. 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 of Civ. Proc., § 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 of Civ. Proc., § 2034.610,(b).) The motion shall be accompanied by a meet and confer declaration. (Code of Civ. Proc., § 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:

  1. The court has taken into account the extent to which the opposing party has relied on the list of expert witnesses.
  2. 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.
  3. The court has determined either of the following:
    1. 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.
    2. 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:
      1. Sought leave to augment or amend promptly after deciding to call the expert witness or to offer the different or additional testimony.
      2. Promptly thereafter served a copy of the proposed expert witness information concerning the expert or the testimony described in § 2034.260 on all other parties who have appeared in the action.
  4. Leave to augment or amend is conditioned on the moving party making the expert available immediately for a deposition under Article 3 (commencing with § 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. § 2034.620.)

Judicial Interpretation of § 2034

The spirit of Code of Civil Procedure § 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.)

Rulings for Augmentation of Expert Witness List in California

.: 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 Witness List is GRANTED. Factual Background This is a negligence action.

  • Name

    ROBERT VARTZAR ET AL VS NEW STAR REALTY INC

  • Case No.

    BC721623

  • Hearing

    Feb 25, 2020

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 address of any expert witness whom that party has subsequently retained.

  • Name

    ROBERT CLARK VS STEPHEN G OWEN M D

  • Case No.

    BC599993

  • Hearing

    Oct 09, 2018

.: BC581837 Hearing Date: March 22, 2019 [TENTATIVE] order RE: motion to augment Plaintiffs’ Expert witness list Background Plaintiff Kevorak Abajian (“Plaintiff”) moves to augment his expert witness designation. Defendant Muneerah Mohammed Alammari (“Defendant”) opposes the motion. The motion is granted.

  • Name

    KEVORK ABAJIAN VS MUNEERAH MOHAMMED ALAMMARI

  • Case No.

    BC581837

  • Hearing

    Mar 22, 2019

The court grants defendants Mary Lucille Bennett and Student 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 witnessexpert witness declaration, on or before May 26, 2017. Plaintiff may submit a supplemental expert disclosure identifying any additional expert witness on or before June 9, 2017.

  • Name

    JENNIFER CLOUD VS STUDENT TRANSPORTATION OF AMERICA INC ET AL

  • Case No.

    16CV01260

  • Hearing

    May 15, 2017

Plaintiff Jane Doe’s motion to augment her expert witness list pursuant to CCP §§ 2034.610 and 2034.620 is GRANTED. Plaintiff’s proposed expert, Dr. Suzie Dupee, may testify in Plaintiff’s case-in-chief regarding the psychiatric and psychological testing and results used by Defendant’s expert, as well as a rebuttal witness to Defendant’s expert, Dr. Constance Dalenberg.

  • Name

    DOE VS. LOS ALAMITOS UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT

  • Case No.

    30-2015-00806932-CU-PO-CJC

  • Hearing

    Mar 06, 2017

Plaintiff's motion to augment Plaintiff's expert witness list is conditionally granted. CCP §§ 2034.610, 2034.620.

  • Name

    MIRWAIS MOJADIDDI VS SEAN RYAN

  • Case No.

    37-2017-00030889-CU-PA-CTL

  • Hearing

    Sep 13, 2018

Discussion 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 address of any expert witness whom that party has subsequently retained.

  • Name

    MEGAN SHERER VS TONY KIM ET AL

  • Case No.

    BC575864

  • Hearing

    Apr 24, 2018

This mistake does not pertain to Plaintiff’s ability to designate or identify the need for Bruno as an expert, or an expert of that type. Instead, the mistake pertains to how Plaintiff could properly augment the witness list. For these reasons, none of the requirements set forth under CCP §2034.620 to augment the witness list have been met. The motion for leave to augment witness list is DENIED.

  • Name

    FERNANDO VALENCIA VS OSCAR OCHOA

  • Case No.

    BC516970

  • Hearing

    Nov 04, 2016

: (A) Sought leave to augment or amend promptly after deciding to call the expert witness or to offer the different or additional testimony.

  • Name

    JENNIFER Y AKBARI VS NAVANJUN S GREWAL M D

  • Case No.

    BC603881

  • Hearing

    Nov 01, 2018

.: BC634189 Hearing Date: August 28, 2019 [TENTATIVE] order RE: motion to augment Plaintiffs’ Expert witness list Background Plaintiff Kiritkumar Mangaldas (“Plaintiff”) moves to augment his expert witness designation. Defendant The End Zone Sports Bar & Restaurant (“Defendant”) opposes the motion. The motion is denied without prejudice.

  • Name

    KIRITKUMAR MANGALDAS VS THE END ZONE SPORTS BAR & RESTAURANT

  • Case No.

    BC634189

  • Hearing

    Aug 28, 2019

Mack as an Expert or to Augment Cell Crete?s Expert Witness List The Motion is DENIED.

  • Name

    ADCO CONSTRUCTION DEFECT

  • Case No.

    CORD 4327-O

  • Hearing

    Oct 26, 2005

Plaintiffs' motion to augment expert witness list is conditionally granted. CCP §§ 2034.610, 2034.620.

  • Name

    NOBLE VS MILLER

  • Case No.

    37-2016-00001543-CU-PA-CTL

  • Hearing

    May 25, 2017

. § 2034.610(a)(1), on the 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, by adding the name and address of any expert witness whom the party has subsequently retained.

  • Name

    ROMO VS. LEE

  • Case No.

    30-2017-00952949-CU-PA-CJC

  • Hearing

    Oct 31, 2019

CALENDAR MATTER #10 TENTATIVE ORDER Defendant Foster’s motion to augment expert witness information is GRANTED. Moving Party to give NOTICE. Defendant Foster moves to augment his expert witness designation pursuant to CCP § 2034.610 et seq.

  • Name

    USBALDO MUNOZ VS SEAN NICHOLAS FOSTER

  • Case No.

    VC067199

  • Hearing

    Jul 21, 2020

  • Judge

    Lori Ann Fournier or Olivia Rosales

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

.: 37-2020-00029049-CU-PO-CTL CASE TITLE: SUTOR DDS VS HILTON MANAGEMENT LLC [IMAGED] CASE CATEGORY: Civil - Unlimited CASE TYPE: PI/PD/WD - Other EVENT TYPE: Motion Hearing (Civil) CAUSAL DOCUMENT/DATE FILED: Motion to Augment Expert Witness List, 02/23/2023 Plaintiffs Mark Sutor, D.D.S. and Theresa Sutor's Motion to Augment Expert Witness list is GRANTED. Code of Civil Procedure § 2034.610(a) authorizes the court to grant leave to a party to augment or amend its expert witness designation list.

  • Name

    SUTOR DDS VS HILTON MANAGEMENT LLC

  • Case No.

    37-2020-00029049-CU-PO-CTL

  • Hearing

    Mar 27, 2023

  • County

    San Diego County, CA

On January 5, 2017, Plaintiff filed this motion for leave to augment her expert witness list. Previously, the Court issued a protective order excluding Plaintiff’s previously designated cardiology expert, Dr. Wohlgelernter, based upon a conflict of interest between the expert witness and defense counsel. In addition, the Court found that there was minimal prejudice because Plaintiff had designated two cardiology experts. The trial was continued to June 5, 2017.

  • Name

    LISA GALBREATH V. THOMAS CLARK

  • Case No.

    CV12-0518

  • Hearing

    Feb 09, 2017

Legal Standard Code of Civil Procedure § 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: 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.

  • Name

    IMAGECRAFT PRODUCTIONS INC VS HOLLYWOOD CENTER STAGES INC ET

  • Case No.

    BC601491

  • Hearing

    Jan 25, 2021

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Landlord Tenant

Sial’s unavailability as opposed to the substitution of an expert witness. Conclusion and Order Plaintiff’s motion to augment his expert witness list is denied without prejudice. Plaintiff is ordered to provide notice of this order and file proof of service of such.

  • Name

    JIMMY GARCIA VS PHONG TRAN ET AL

  • Case No.

    BC714343

  • Hearing

    Feb 02, 2021

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

following: "(A) Sought leave to augment or amend promptly after deciding to call the expert witness or to offer the different or additional testimony.

  • Name

    IMPRESO VS VAN HOUT

  • Case No.

    37-2018-00048450-CU-PA-CTL

  • Hearing

    Dec 19, 2019

(2) 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: (A) sought leave to augment or amend promptly after deciding to call the expert witness or to offer the different or additional testimony, and (B) promptly thereafter served a copy of the proposed expert witness information concerning the expert

  • Name

    TOMASA ROBLES VS LOS ANGELES COUNTY MTA

  • Case No.

    BC661395

  • Hearing

    Sep 20, 2019

On April 29, 2022, Defendant filed the instant Motion to Augment Expert Witness Designation.

  • Name

    JAFAR ROUHBAKHSHYENGEJEH VS BEATRICE MONTANEZ

  • Case No.

    19STCV30292

  • Hearing

    Jun 07, 2022

On April 29, 2022, Defendant filed the instant Motion to Augment Expert Witness Designation.

  • Name

    JAFAR ROUHBAKHSHYENGEJEH VS BEATRICE MONTANEZ

  • Case No.

    19STCV30292

  • Hearing

    Jun 13, 2022

The motion of the defendants to augment the expert witness list pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure sections 2034.610 and 2034.620 is GRANTED. The Court has taken into account the extent to which the plaintiff has relied on the expert witness list and has determined that the plaintiff will not be prejudiced by the augment in maintaining the plaintiff’s case.

  • Name

    PEREZ V. DATU

  • Case No.

    30-2017-00914352-CU-PA-CJC

  • Hearing

    Jul 11, 2019

LEGAL STANDARDS On motion of any party who has engaged in a timely exchange of expert witness information, the court may grant leave to (1) augment that partys expert witness list and declaration by adding the name and address of any expert witness whom that party has subsequently retained; and/or (2) amend that partys expert witness declaration with respect to the general substance of the testimony that an expert previously designated is expected to give. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2034.610, subd.

  • Name

    KENDRA DENISE BROWN VS AKOP KVRYAN, ET AL.

  • Case No.

    20STCV35012

  • Hearing

    Jul 07, 2023

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

: (A) Sought leave to augment or amend promptly after deciding to call the expert witness or to offer the different or additional testimony.

  • Name

    TUSHEARL L JOHNSON VS WENHAN XU ET AL

  • Case No.

    BC559305

  • Hearing

    Aug 17, 2016

So Plaintiff Williams cannot call Joseph Yates as an expert witness at trial, unless Plaintiff Williams can show good cause for permission to augment his expert witness list. Motion to Augment Expert Witness List In Opposition, Defendant Magnell argues correctly that he would be unfairly prejudiced if Plaintiff Williams were allowed to call Yates as an expert witness at trial, because the discovery cut-off under CCP 2024.020 and the expert discovery cut-off under CCP 2024.030 have already passed.

  • Name

    WILLIAMS V. MAGNELL

  • Case No.

    30-2018-00993726-CU-PA-CJC

  • Hearing

    May 02, 2019

Defendant seeks to augment its expert witness list with an “aquatic” expert. Both motions are denied. Legal Standard A.

  • Name

    NIUKKA HERNANDEZ VS BEVERLY HOT SPRINGS INC ET AL

  • Case No.

    BC627222

  • Hearing

    Jul 22, 2020

Code of Civil Procedure section 2034.610 grants the court discretion to grant leave to augment an expert witness designation on motion of any party who has engaged in a timely exchange of expert witness information. The court shall grant leave to augment or amend an expert witness list only if all of the following conditions are satisfied: (a) The court has taken into account the extent to which the opposing party has relied on the list of expert witnesses.

  • Name

    JENNIFER Y AKBARI VS NAVANJUN S GREWAL M D

  • Case No.

    BC603881

  • Hearing

    Nov 19, 2018

  • Judge

    Yolanda Orozco or Laura A. Seigle

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Medical Malpractice

: (A) Sought leave to augment or amend promptly after deciding to call the expert witness or to offer the different or additional testimony.

  • Name

    ANI KHACHIKYAN, ET AL. VS PLATINUM TRANSPORTATION GROUP, INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, ET AL.

  • Case No.

    22STCV29276

  • Hearing

    Feb 15, 2024

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

PARTYS REQUEST Plaintiff asks the Court to grant it leave to augment its expert witness list. LEGAL STANDARD CCP § 2034.610 governs motions to augment expert witness lists . A party who has engaged in a timely exchange of expert witness information may move to add the name and address of a subsequently retained witness or to amend the statement of the testimony a previously designated expert is expected to give.

  • Name

    JORDAN NICE VS HOME DEPOT, U.S.A., INC.

  • Case No.

    19STCV10729

  • Hearing

    Feb 21, 2023

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

City moves to augment its expert witness designation to add Michael Brant-Zawadski, M.D. as an expert witness. Edwards filed a notice of non-opposition to City’s Motion to augment the expert designation.

  • Name

    RICHARD CASTRO ET AL VS LINDY CLAIRE EDWARDS ET AL

  • Case No.

    BC604952

  • Hearing

    Jun 28, 2019

Further, to succeed in a motion to augment an expert witness declaration, the party seeking to amend must show that it “…would not in the exercise of reasonable diligence have determined to call that expert or have decided to offer the different or additional testimony of that expert witness. See CCP §2034.620(c)(1). Here, plaintiffs timely served their original expert witness designation on January 23, 2018.

  • Name

    BRITO-MONICA V. FENG

  • Case No.

    VCU 265405

  • Hearing

    Aug 16, 2018

(2) 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. Pursuant to this statute, Plaintiff seeks leave to augment Plaintiff’s expert witness designation to include a vocational rehabilitation expert. CCP § 2034.620 (a)-(c) contains a list of conditions for granting leave to augment.

  • Name

    KRISTINA RUTH DIAMANTONI VS SUSAN JESS WEISS ET AL

  • Case No.

    BC575876

  • Hearing

    Oct 18, 2016

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 address of any expert witness whom that party has subsequently retained.

  • Name

    HECTOR DE LA MORA VS VALLARTA SUPERMARKETS ET AL

  • Case No.

    BC560187

  • Hearing

    Jun 25, 2018

Code of Civil Procedure section 2034.610, states, “(a) 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 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 testimony that an expert previously designated

  • Name

    WALLACE V. ORANGE COUNTY GLOBAL MEDICAL CENTER

  • Case No.

    30-2017-00921927

  • Hearing

    Jul 21, 2020

: [¶] 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.

  • Name

    AIMEE MANUELL VS ISMAEL RIVERA ET AL

  • Case No.

    BC606497

  • Hearing

    Jun 20, 2022

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

: (A) Sought leave to augment or amend promptly after deciding to call the expert witness or to offer the different or additional testimony.

  • Name

    LORENA BELMAN VS. GARCIA AND GALLARZO PROPERTY H0LDINGS, LLC

  • Case No.

    VC065875

  • Hearing

    Jan 05, 2022

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

CCP § 2034.610 Code of Civil Procedure section 2034.610 grants the court discretion to grant leave to augment an expert witness designation on motion of any party who has engaged in a timely exchange of expert witness information. The court shall grant leave to augment or amend an expert witness list only if all of the following conditions are satisfied: (a) The court has taken into account the extent to which the opposing party has relied on the list of expert witnesses.

  • Name

    TANAZ ZAMANI VS CITY OF REDONDO BEACH ET AL

  • Case No.

    BC637727

  • Hearing

    Sep 18, 2018

On August 25, 2021, Plaintiff filed the instant motion to augment Plaintiff’s expert witness list. Defendants Malcolm S. Watson (“Watson”) and Candice Seals (“Seals”), erroneously sued as Candace Seals, and Defendant Jerry Ragland, Administrator of the Estate of Thomas Blanton Null aka Thomas Null (“Ragland”) each oppose the motion. Plaintiff filed a joint reply to both oppositions. 2. Motion to Augment Expert Witness List CCP § 2034.610 governs motions to augment expert witness lists.

  • Name

    MATTHEW AARON PICKART VS MALCOLM S WATSON ET AL

  • Case No.

    BC658162

  • Hearing

    Sep 21, 2021

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

: (A) Sought leave to augment or amend promptly after deciding to call the expert witness or to offer the different or additional testimony.

  • Name

    DEANE MONROE, ET AL. VS MILLICENT ROVELO, MD, ET AL.

  • Case No.

    18STCV01696

  • Hearing

    Jul 28, 2022

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

.: BC603315 Hearing Date: February 4, 2019 [TENTATIVE] order RE: motion to augment Plaintiffs’ Expert witness list Background Plaintiffs Dawn Kovach and Don Brady (“Plaintiffs”) move to augment their expert witness designation. Defendant Rosario Mendez (“Defendant”) opposes the motion. The motion is granted.

  • Name

    DAWN KOVACH ET AL VS EDWIN HYATT ET AL

  • Case No.

    BC603315

  • Hearing

    Feb 04, 2019

On June 19, 2020, Plaintiff filed a motion for leave to augment his expert witness list pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure section 2034.610. On June 23, 2020, the Court scheduled Plaintiff’s motion for leave to augment his expert witness list to be heard on October 30, 2020. A trial setting conference is scheduled for November 3, 2020. PARTY’S REQUESTS Plaintiff asks the Court for leave to change Babak Samimi, M.D. from a non-retained expert to a retained expert.

  • Name

    SANTOS FLANIKEN VS TIMOTHY R COMMERFORD ET AL

  • Case No.

    BC693615

  • Hearing

    Oct 30, 2020

(a) 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 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 testimony that an expert previously designated is expected to give.

  • Name

    ANTHONY LUNA, ET AL. VS JFC INTERNATIONAL INC., ET AL.

  • Case No.

    19STCV26374

  • Hearing

    Jul 12, 2021

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

(2) 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: (A) sought leave to augment or amend promptly after deciding to call the expert witness or to offer the different or additional testimony, and (B) promptly thereafter served a copy of the proposed expert witness information concerning the expert

  • Name

    TOMASA ROBLES VS LOS ANGELES COUNTY MTA

  • Case No.

    BC661395

  • Hearing

    Aug 09, 2019

(“Moving Defendant”) now moves for leave to augment his expert witness list to include Constantine Boukidis as an economics expert. Moving Defendant seeks leave under both sections 2034.610 and 2034.620 of the Code of Civil Procedure. 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. Cal. Code of Civ. Proc. § 2034.610.

  • Name

    LINDA BIANCHI ET AL VS PACIFICA HOSPITAL OF THE VALLEY ET AL

  • Case No.

    BC584868

  • Hearing

    Aug 04, 2017

Plaintiff knew back in Aug. 2011 that he was retaining Life Care Planning Expert Roughon for his case; and in Dec. 2011, Plaintiff's counsel discovered the omission and requested a stipulation from Defense counsel to augment the expert witness list. Defense counsel said no. Plaintiff had the obligation to seek relief from the Court. Yet, Plaintiff did nothing to augment the expert witness list from Dec. 2011 to April 26, 2012. Within that time, Defendants relied on Plaintiff's expert witness list.

  • Name

    CESAREO CUAUHTLI VS UNDERWOOD AND SON LLC

  • Case No.

    56-2010-00386499-CU-PA-VTA

  • Hearing

    May 23, 2012

LEGAL STANDARD Code of Civil Procedure section 2034.610 provides: (a) 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 partys expert witness list and declaration by adding the name and address of any expert witness whom that party has subsequently retained.

  • Name

    JEFFREY BOYAJIAN, ET AL. VS SHAD GROVES, DC

  • Case No.

    20STCV02911

  • Hearing

    Aug 18, 2023

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

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: (A) sought leave to augment or amend promptly after deciding to call the expert witness or to offer the different or additional testimony, and (B) promptly thereafter served a copy of the proposed expert witness information concerning the expert or the

  • Name

    AML MOUMARE VS STATER BROS. MARKETS

  • Case No.

    18STCV04430

  • Hearing

    Oct 05, 2022

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

.: BC583612 [TENTATIVE] ORDER RE: MOTION TO AUGMENT EXPERT WITNESS LIST Plaintiff Eduard Gabrielyan’s Motion to Augment Designation of Expert Witnesses is GRANTED. Plaintiff has leave to augment his expert witness list and declaration by adding the name of expert witness Anne Barnes. CCP § 2034.610(a).

  • Name

    EDUARD GABRIELYAN VS OAKS CENTER PROPERTIES INC

  • Case No.

    BC583612

  • Hearing

    Mar 06, 2017

Motion: Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to Augment Expert Witness List Tentative Ruling: To deny the request to augment the expert witness designation. Plaintiff seeks to augment his expert witness designation to include a neurologist who examined the minor that is the subject of this action. This matter relates to a schoolyard injury which occurred on April 25, 1016. Plaintiff was hit on the head by a baseball thrown by another student.

  • Name

    GINTHER V. SEQUOIA UNION ELEMENTARY SCHOOL

  • Case No.

    VCU268985

  • Hearing

    Jul 10, 2018

Nazerian’s Motion for Leave to Augment Expert Witness Designation Legal Standard “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 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 testimony

  • Name

    GUADALUPE M LOPEZ VS EL MONTE CITY SCHOOL DISTICT ET AL

  • Case No.

    BC649021

  • Hearing

    Mar 05, 2021

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

s motion for leave to augment expert witness list is granted. The Court allows these defendants to augment their expert witness designation to include a medical billing expert. The defendants shall serve their augmented expert witness designation by August 21, 2020. Upon request by plaintiff's counsel, defendants shall promptly produce the newly designated expert witness for deposition.

  • Name

    GALLEGOS VS DUENAS

  • Case No.

    37-2018-00049785-CU-PA-NC

  • Hearing

    Aug 13, 2020

NATURE OF PROCEEDINGS: MOTION —- TO AUGMENT EXPERT WITNESS LIST [DEFT] KIA MOTORS AMERICA, INC, RULING Defendant Kia Motors America, Inc.’s (“Defendant”) Motion for Leave to Augment Expert Witness List pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 2034.620 is GRANTED. Defendant shall immediately make Mr. Richards available for deposition.

  • Case No.

    CV2002226

  • Hearing

    Mar 07, 2023

  • County

    Marin County, CA

NATURE OF PROCEEDINGS: MOTION —- TO AUGMENT EXPERT WITNESS LIST [DEFT] KIA MOTORS AMERICA, INC, RULING Defendant Kia Motors America, Inc.’s (“Defendant”) Motion for Leave to Augment Expert Witness List pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 2034.620 is GRANTED. Defendant shall immediately make Mr. Richards available for deposition.

  • Case No.

    CV2002226

  • Hearing

    Mar 04, 2023

  • County

    Marin County, CA

NATURE OF PROCEEDINGS: MOTION —- TO AUGMENT EXPERT WITNESS LIST [DEFT] KIA MOTORS AMERICA, INC, RULING Defendant Kia Motors America, Inc.’s (“Defendant”) Motion for Leave to Augment Expert Witness List pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 2034.620 is GRANTED. Defendant shall immediately make Mr. Richards available for deposition.

  • Case No.

    CV2002226

  • Hearing

    Mar 01, 2023

  • County

    Marin County, CA

NATURE OF PROCEEDINGS: MOTION —- TO AUGMENT EXPERT WITNESS LIST [DEFT] KIA MOTORS AMERICA, INC, RULING Defendant Kia Motors America, Inc.’s (“Defendant”) Motion for Leave to Augment Expert Witness List pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 2034.620 is GRANTED. Defendant shall immediately make Mr. Richards available for deposition.

  • Case No.

    CV2002226

  • Hearing

    Mar 02, 2023

  • County

    Marin County, CA

NATURE OF PROCEEDINGS: MOTION —- TO AUGMENT EXPERT WITNESS LIST [DEFT] KIA MOTORS AMERICA, INC, RULING Defendant Kia Motors America, Inc.’s (“Defendant”) Motion for Leave to Augment Expert Witness List pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 2034.620 is GRANTED. Defendant shall immediately make Mr. Richards available for deposition.

  • Case No.

    CV2002226

  • Hearing

    Mar 06, 2023

  • County

    Marin County, CA

NATURE OF PROCEEDINGS: MOTION —- TO AUGMENT EXPERT WITNESS LIST [DEFT] KIA MOTORS AMERICA, INC, RULING Defendant Kia Motors America, Inc.’s (“Defendant”) Motion for Leave to Augment Expert Witness List pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 2034.620 is GRANTED. Defendant shall immediately make Mr. Richards available for deposition.

  • Case No.

    CV2002226

  • Hearing

    Mar 05, 2023

  • County

    Marin County, CA

NATURE OF PROCEEDINGS: MOTION —- TO AUGMENT EXPERT WITNESS LIST [DEFT] KIA MOTORS AMERICA, INC, RULING Defendant Kia Motors America, Inc.’s (“Defendant”) Motion for Leave to Augment Expert Witness List pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 2034.620 is GRANTED. Defendant shall immediately make Mr. Richards available for deposition.

  • Case No.

    CV2002226

  • Hearing

    Mar 03, 2023

  • County

    Marin County, CA

: (A) Sought leave to augment or amend promptly after deciding to call the expert witness or to offer the different or additional testimony.

  • Name

    BENALLY VS POINT LOMA LITTLE LEAGUE

  • Case No.

    37-2015-00039127-CU-PO-CTL

  • Hearing

    Aug 10, 2017

ANALYSIS On motion of any party who has engaged in a timely exchange of expert witness information, the court may grant leave to (1) augment that partys expert witness list and declaration by adding the name and address of any expert witness whom that party has subsequently retained; and/or (2) amend that partys expert witness declaration with respect to the general substance of the testimony that an expert previously designated is expected to give. (CCP § 2034.610(a).)

  • Name

    ANTOININE DI MODICA, ET AL. VS MICHAEL L. KAYLOR, IN HIS INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY AN IN HIS CAPACITY AS TRUSTEE OF THE MELILLI TRUST, ET AL.

  • Case No.

    20STCV40403

  • Hearing

    Apr 14, 2023

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

(1) Motion to Augment Expert Witness List (2) TSC Tentative Ruling: Defendant Fine Art & Collectibles Enterprises dba Face Insurance Services’ motion for leave to augment supplemental expert witness designation is GRANTED. Defendant has demonstrated good cause for the relief sought. Specifically: (1) Defendant’s failure to designate Ms.

  • Name

    ANTON SEGERSTROM VS. AXA ART INS

  • Case No.

    30-2015-00820323-CU-JR-CJC

  • Hearing

    Apr 17, 2018

King was stricken from Plaintiff’s supplemental witness list, Plaintiff filed a motion to augment expert witness designation on June 7, 2019. Plaintiff now moves the court for an order allowing Plaintiff to augment their expert witness list by adding include Dr. King as a retained expert in the field of radiology.

  • Name

    CARRIE TIVADOR VS EQUINOX HOLDINGS INC

  • Case No.

    BC641396

  • Hearing

    Jul 01, 2019

.: BC634189 Hearing Date: August 28, 2019 [TENTATIVE] order RE: motion to augment Plaintiffs’ Expert witness list Background Plaintiff Kathy Pauline Morris (“Plaintiff”) moves to augment her expert witness designation. Defendants Hakob Babajanyan and TLA Limousine, Inc. (“Defendants”) oppose the motion. The motion is granted.

  • Name

    KIRITKUMAR MANGALDAS VS THE END ZONE SPORTS BAR & RESTAURANT

  • Case No.

    BC634189

  • Hearing

    Nov 15, 2019

CCP §2034.610 governs motions to augment expert witness lists. (a) 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 address of any expert witness whom that party has subsequently retained.

  • Name

    DONALD WONG VS GREG SU, ET AL.

  • Case No.

    20STCV02659

  • Hearing

    Jul 30, 2021

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

( Ibid. ) Under CCP section 2034.610(a), on motion of any party who has engaged in a timely exchange of expert witness information, the court may grant leave to either or both of the following: (1) augment that partys expert witness list and declaration by adding the name and address of any expert witness whom that party has subsequently retained, or (2) amend that partys expert witness declaration with respect to the general substance of the testimony that an expert previously designated

  • Name

    SCOTT R GREGOR, ET AL. VS ALFONZO GUTIERREZ SANCHEZ, ET AL.

  • Case No.

    19STCV04843

  • Hearing

    Dec 13, 2022

On motion of any party who has engaged in a timely exchange of expert witness information, the court may grant leave to (1) augment that partys expert witness list and declaration by adding the name and address of any expert witness whom that party has subsequently retained; and/or (2) amend that partys expert witness declaration with respect to the general substance of the testimony that an expert previously designated is expected to give. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2034.610, subd. (a).)

  • Name

    PATRICIA KNOX VS ROSALIND WESEY, ET AL.

  • Case No.

    20STCV02815

  • Hearing

    Apr 28, 2022

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

Defendant moves for leave to augment his expert witness list on the following grounds: defendant has satisfied the conditions required in order to grant leave to augment his expert witness designations; defendant has made good faith efforts to resolve the issues; and the motion is timely, because plaintiff has sufficient time to depose Dr. Winter prior to trial.

  • Name

    ZANDONELLA V. SPAKOSKY

  • Case No.

    PC-20170016

  • Hearing

    Dec 13, 2018

The parties met-and-conferred about this motion, and Plaintiff’s counsel agreed to stipulate to allow Defendant to augment her expert witness list if Defendant stipulated to let Plaintiff’s counsel replace Dr. Jacob Tauber, based on his indictment and guilty plea, but Defendant would not stipulate. The motion is denied. LEGAL STANDARD The Court has authority to allow parties to augment their expert witness designations, per Code of Civil Procedure, section 2034.610(a).

  • Name

    VICTOR VALLEJANO VS JASMINE DIAZ

  • Case No.

    BC648575

  • Hearing

    Aug 30, 2019

to call that expert witness or have decided to offer the different or additional testimony of that expert witness or (b) 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 both sought leave to augment or amend properly after deciding to call the expert witness or to offer the different or additional testimony and promptly thereafter

  • Name

    GREER V. REED

  • Case No.

    30-2018-01000268-CU-NP-CJC

  • Hearing

    Aug 01, 2019

Trial is currently set for March 28, 2017 and the parties have exchanged their expert witness lists. Plaintiff moves for leave to augment his expert witness list to add Michael Davis, M.D. A court must grant leave to augment or amend an expert witness list only if all of the following conditions are satisfied: (a) The court has taken into account the extent to which the opposing party has relied on the list of expert witnesses.

  • Name

    RAFAEL ESCOBAR VS RELIABLE CAMIERS INC ET AL

  • Case No.

    BC589244

  • Hearing

    Mar 03, 2017

If the motion is granted, Defendant requests that it be granted on certain conditions, including that Defendant be allowed to augment his expert list and take additional medical exams at Plaintiffs expense. 2. Motion to Augment Expert Witness List CCP § 2034.610 governs motions to augment expert witness lists.

  • Name

    DERRICK ANDERSON VS CHRISTOPHER AKL LAU

  • Case No.

    20STCV10453

  • Hearing

    May 08, 2023

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

Augment Expert Witness List Code of Civil Procedure § 2034.610 grants the court discretion to grant leave to augment an expert witness designation on motion of any party who has engaged in a timely exchange of expert witness information.

  • Name

    MARIAM ISKANDARYAN, ET AL. VS MIKE YURA HOVHANNISYAN, ET AL.

  • Case No.

    21STCV11800

  • Hearing

    Nov 17, 2023

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

Motion to Augment Expert Witness List CCP §2034.610 governs motions to augment expert witness lists . (a) 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 address of any expert witness whom that party has subsequently retained .

  • Name

    SILVIA REYES VS COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, ET AL.

  • Case No.

    20STCV16875

  • Hearing

    Jan 19, 2024

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

: [¶] 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.”

  • Name

    ARSEN GEVORGYAN VS ELENA JANET AREVALO PANIAGUA

  • Case No.

    BC692630

  • Hearing

    Jul 21, 2020

: (A) Sought leave to augment or amend promptly after deciding to call the expert witness or to offer the different or additional testimony.

  • Name

    MATTHEW G LOPEZ BAUTISTA VS FOOTHILL PRESBYTERIAN HOSPITAL

  • Case No.

    BC693486

  • Hearing

    May 06, 2021

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Medical Malpractice

following: “(A) Sought leave to augment or amend promptly after deciding to call the expert witness or to offer the different or additional testimony.

  • Name

    MARLA COX-WILLIAMS VS LAND AND SEA LLC

  • Case No.

    16CV01846

  • Hearing

    May 19, 2017

CASE NO: BC538692 [TENTATIVE] ORDER RE: PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AUGMENT EXPERT WITNESS LIST Dept. 98 1:30 p.m. November 7, 2016 On March 10, 2014, Plaintiff Jacquelyn Everett aka Jacqui Everett (“Plaintiff”) filed this action. The parties have exchanged their Expert Witness List and Designation. Plaintiff now moves for leave to augment her Expert Witness List and Designation to add James Tibone, M.D. Plaintiff asserts that Dr.

  • Name

    JACQUELYN EVERETT VS THE RITZ-CARLTON HOTEL COMPANY LLC ET A

  • Case No.

    BC538692

  • Hearing

    Nov 07, 2016

On 4/25/19, this Court granted the motion and allowed defendants to augment their witness designation. The court’s order did not say whether the court was augmenting expert witness designation only to permit designation of a medical doctor to counter the opinions offered in Dr. Smith’s deposition or to permit the designation of any witness arguably relevant to the injuries the plaintiff suffered. Thus, the issue in this motion comes down to what the court intended in granting defendants’ motion to augment.

  • Name

    PHAM VS WILSON

  • Case No.

    30-2018-00989599-CU-PA-CJC

  • Hearing

    Jul 22, 2019

: (A) Sought leave to augment or amend promptly after deciding to call the expert witness or to offer the different or additional testimony.

  • Name

    ARDIZZONE V. ARDIZZONE

  • Case No.

    30-2015-00783049-CU-PO-CJC

  • Hearing

    Mar 01, 2017

Based on the foregoing, the Court finds that Koenig and Alessi have demonstrated good cause to augment their respective expert witness lists. Conclusion B ased on the foregoing, Koenigs application for an order permitting him to augment his expert witness designation is granted.

  • Name

    RICK SIEGEL VS DAVID A ALESSI ET AL

  • Case No.

    BC689037

  • Hearing

    Sep 01, 2023

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

Based on the foregoing, the Court finds that Koenig and Alessi have demonstrated good cause to augment their respective expert witness lists. Conclusion B ased on the foregoing, Koenigs application for an order permitting him to augment his expert witness designation is granted.

  • Name

    JOHN ROE 446 C.H. VS DOE 1

  • Case No.

    22STCV40163

  • Hearing

    Sep 01, 2023

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

Motion to Augment Expert Witness List Plaintiff moves for leave to augment her expert witness list to add a biomechanical expert designation. She moves on two grounds. First, she contends her 6/27/19 expert designation was proper, and the Court should acknowledge its propriety. Second, she contends that, to the extent the supplemental designation was not proper, the Court should permit her leave to add a biomechanical expert. a.

  • Name

    CAROLYN PEARSON VS JOHN CHON YOUNG KIM ET AL

  • Case No.

    BC649781

  • Hearing

    Jul 23, 2019

leave to augment or amend promptly after deciding to call the expert witness or to offer the different or additional testimony.

  • Name

    YESENIA GARCIA VS TAREA WALI AHMADAI ET AL

  • Case No.

    BC582281

  • Hearing

    Feb 15, 2018

MDA FAVARO Plaintiff City of West Hollywood’s Motion to Augment Expert Witness List is GRANTED. ANALYSIS: Plaintiff seeks leave to augment its expert witness list and replace Steve Angelo with Richard Avelar. Angelo suddenly passed away on few days before 9/27/17.

  • Name

    CITY OF WEST HOLLYWOOD VS. MDA JOHNSON FAVARO

  • Case No.

    SC122763

  • Hearing

    Nov 29, 2017

: (A) Sought leave to augment or amend promptly after deciding to call the expert witness or to offer the different or additional testimony.

  • Name

    MANUEL VALENCIA VS LUIS GUERRA ET AL

  • Case No.

    BC605107

  • Hearing

    Nov 19, 2018

  • Judge

    Yolanda Orozco or Laura A. Seigle

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

after deciding to call the expert witness and served a copy of the proposed expert witness information to all other parties.

  • Name

    JARED HARTSTEIN VS CITY OF LA HABRA HEIGHTS ET AL

  • Case No.

    BC643384

  • Hearing

    Sep 13, 2019

Plaintiffs Dan Richardson, Andrea Richardson and Judith Carter’s motion for leave to augment the expert witness designation is DENIED. Pursuant to C.C.P. §2034.610(a)(1), upon motion by a 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, to add the name of any expert witness whom that party has subsequently retained.

  • Name

    DAN RICHARDSON VS. HUNTINGTON PACIFIC BEACH HOUSE CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION

  • Case No.

    30-2014-00714844-CU-OR-CJC

  • Hearing

    May 01, 2017

Motion to Augment Expert Witness List CCP § 2034.610 governs motions to augment expert witness lists. (a) 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 address of any expert witness whom that party has subsequently retained.

  • Name

    MARICEL MAGNAYE-PITCHER VS DANILO SOLIS TRINIDAD, ET AL.

  • Case No.

    20STCV31054

  • Hearing

    May 03, 2023

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

following: [¶] (1) 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. [¶] (2) 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: [¶] (A) Sought leave to augment

  • Name

    WALLACE V. ORANGE COUNTY GLOBAL MEDICAL CENTER

  • Case No.

    30-2017-00921927-CU-MM-CJC

  • Hearing

    Feb 18, 2020

Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 2034.610, the court may grant leave to augment an expert witness designation on motion of any party who has engaged in a timely exchange of expert witness information by adding the name and address of any expert witness whom that party has subsequently retained. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2034.610, subd. (a)(1).)

  • Name

    HUMBERTO DELGADO MARTINEZ VS LUIS ANGEL ALONSO ET AL

  • Case No.

    BC684853

  • Hearing

    Jun 04, 2019

: [¶] 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.”

  • Name

    PAUL FISHER VS YOSEF SHEMTOV ET AL

  • Case No.

    BC652315

  • Hearing

    Jun 15, 2021

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

Code of Civil Procedure section 2034.610 grants the court discretion to grant leave to augment an expert witness designation on motion of any party who has engaged in a timely exchange of expert witness information. The court shall grant leave to augment or amend an expert witness list only if all of the following conditions are satisfied: (a) The court has taken into account the extent to which the opposing party has relied on the list of expert witnesses.

  • Name

    DONALD CLEEK ET AL VS SOO RAN BAEK ET AL

  • Case No.

    BC629907

  • Hearing

    May 03, 2018

(2) 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: (A) Sought leave to augment or amend promptly after deciding to call the expert witness or to offer the different or additional testimony.

  • Name

    KIMBERLY FAY, ET AL. VS GLENN SOLOMON, ET AL.

  • Case No.

    19STCV24611

  • Hearing

    Mar 13, 2023

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

Defendants do not claim any prejudice from allowing Plaintiff to augment his expert witness list to add Casner, and Plaintiff establishes that Plaintiff did not previously disclose that expert due to mistake, inadvertence, surprise, and/or excusable neglect. Further, Plaintiff has served a copy of the proposed expert witness information concerning Casner on Defendants. Based on the foregoing, Plaintiffs request for leave to augment his expert witness list designation is granted.

  • Name

    CRISTOVAL GARCIA CHAVEZ VS KEVIN LEMAR PARROTT ET AL

  • Case No.

    BC701108

  • Hearing

    Aug 30, 2022

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

: (A) Sought leave to augment or amend promptly after deciding to call the expert witness or to offer the different or additional testimony.

  • Name

    NUSS VS CHANDI GROUP USA INC

  • Case No.

    PSC1903963

  • Hearing

    Sep 21, 2022

  • County

    Riverside County, CA

On July 29, 2022, Defendant and Cross-Defendant OLeary filed the instant motion for leave to augment expert witness designation. Plaintiff opposes. II.

  • Name

    KYRA DE MESA, A MINOR BY AND THROUGH HER GUARDIAN AD LITEM, ET AL. VS DAVID BENJAMIN JAMES

  • Case No.

    20STCV24184

  • Hearing

    Aug 26, 2022

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

Gibbons’ opinions seem to be legal arguments in the guise of expert testimony. As such, they are improper subjects of expert testimony. That is a sufficient basis to grant the motion to exclude the testimony, and to deny the motion to augment Plaintiff’s expert witness designation. Moreover, Plaintiff admits that Gibbons was not listed on her expert witness designation, but through her motion, she seeks to augment the expert witness list to add Gibbons as a witness.

  • Name

    PENELOPE ARMSTRONG VS THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ET AL

  • Case No.

    BC528453

  • Hearing

    Sep 27, 2016

  • Judge

    Brian S. Currey or John A. Slawson

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

(2) 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: (A) sought leave to augment or amend promptly after deciding to call the expert witness or to offer the different or additional testimony, and (B) promptly thereafter served a copy of the proposed expert witness information concerning the expert

  • Name

    TANIA ESTRADA VS MICHAEL PRIEBE

  • Case No.

    BC684776

  • Hearing

    Oct 26, 2020

On August 3, 2023, Defendants filed a motion for leave to augment expert designation. On August 23, 2023, Plaintiff opposed. On August 29, 2023, Defendants replied. Legal Standard Code of Civil Procedure section 2034.610 provides that a court may grant leave to augment an expert witness designation on motion of any party who has engaged in a timely exchange of expert witness information.

  • Name

    STANLEY HOROWITZ VS HOME DEPOT U.S.A., INC., ET AL.

  • Case No.

    20STCV01492

  • Hearing

    Sep 06, 2023

Please wait a moment while we load this page.

New Envelope