Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Federal Rule 26 Expert Witness Disclosures: A Primer
Because expert testimony is so important in product liability litigation, disclosure is essential. Failure to comply with the rules governing disclosure can be fatal. A Rule 26 report disclosing proposed opinion testimony must meet specific and substantial criteria. Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(b). The report must contain, inter alia: 1) a complete statement of all opinions to be expressed and the basis or reasons therefor, and 2) the data or other information considered by the witness in forming the opinions. Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(B), Tompkin v. Phillip Morris, 362 F.3d 882, 895 (2004), Brainard v. American Skandia Life Ins. Sopr., 2005 WL 3533545 (6th Cir. 2005). The Advisory Committee Notes on Rule 26 elaborate on the report's requirements:
The report, which is intended to set forth the substance of the direct examination, should be written in a manner that reflects the testimony to be given by the witness and it must be signed by the witness. The report is to disclose the data and other information considered by the expert and any exhibits or charts and summarize or support the expert's opinions. [Advisory Committee Notes, 146 F.R.D. at 634 (emphasis added).]
A Rule 26 report must contain more than conclusory assertions about ultimate issues. Brainard, supra, citing Viterbo v. Dow Chem. Co. 826 F.2d 420, 422 (5th Cir. 1987), quoting Hayes v. Douglas Dynamics, 8 F.3d 88, 92 (1st Cir. 1993). See also, Sharpe v. United States, 230 F.R.D. 452 (E.D. Va. 2000). The Rule 26 report must set forth facts that 'outline a line of reasoning arising from a logical foundation.' Brainard, supra, citing Am. Key. Corp. v. Cole Nat'l Corp., 762 F.2d 1569, 1579-1580 (11th Cir. 1985). 'An expert who supplies nothing but a bottom line supplies nothing of value to the judicial process.' Brainard, supra, citing Mid-State Fertilizer Co. v. Exch. Nat'l Bank, 877 F.2d 1333, 1339 (7th Cir. 1989), citing Richardson v. Richardson-Merrell, Inc., 857 F.2d 823, 829-32 (D.C. Cir. 1988)).
The fundamental purpose of the Rule 26 requirements is to enable an opposing party to prepare for trial. This purpose substantially predates the 1993 revisions that created the 'signed report' requirement. The Advisory Committee Notes on the 1970 Amendments to Rule 26 emphasize that disclosure of expert testimony before trial is necessary if the opposing party is to have a reasonable opportunity to prepare effective cross-examination:
Effective cross-examination of an expert witness requires advance preparation. The lawyer even with the help of his own experts frequently cannot anticipate the particular approach his adversary's expert will take or the data on which he will base his judgment on the stand ' the only substitute for discovery of experts' valuation materials is lengthy and often fruitless ' cross-examination during trial. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 26 Advisory Committee Notes on 1970 Amend-ments; See also King v. Ford Motor Company, 209 F.3d 886 (6th Cir. 2000); Sommer v. Davis, 317 F.3d 686, 690 (6th Cir. 2003).
The Exclusionary Consequences of Inadequate Disclosure
If a Rule 26 report is inadequate to inform the court and the opposing party of the witness's testimony ' if, for example, it is conclusory and lacks foundational details ' the witness's testimony is inadmissible. This result is governed by the provisions of Rule 37(c)(1).
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
Warehouse Liability: Know Before You Stow!
As consumers continue to shift purchasing and consumption habits in the aftermath of the pandemic, manufacturers are increasingly reliant on third-party logistics and warehousing to ensure their products timely reach the market.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.