Plaintiff’s Motion to Exclude Defense Expert Richard Robertson, Ph.D. – DENIED.
The Court finds that Defendant’s failure to initially disclose Dr. Robertson appears to be the result of inadvertence rather than an intentional ploy to place Plaintiff at a disadvantage. Moreover, defense counsel’s declaration establishes that Dr. Robertson was in fact, retained after the initial disclosure date. Therefore, Defendant’s use of the supplemental disclosure procedure appears appropriate in this instance. Lastly, the Court finds no evidence that Plaintiff suffered prejudice as a result of the supplemental disclosure.
Hearing Date
May 29, 2019
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Plaintiff’s Motion to Exclude Defense Expert Richard Robertson, Ph.D. – DENIED.
The Court finds that Defendant’s failure to initially disclose Dr. Robertson appears to be the result of inadvertence rather than an intentional ploy to place Plaintiff at a disadvantage. Moreover, defense counsel’s declaration establishes that Dr. Robertson was in fact, retained after the initial disclosure date. Therefore, Defendant’s use of the supplemental disclosure procedure appears appropriate in this instance. Lastly, the Court finds no evidence that Plaintiff suffered prejudice as a result of the supplemental disclosure.