Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Product Liability Law & StrategyKickerFeaturesTopicsLitigationSectionsNewsLJN Newsletters

Proposed Amendments to Federal Rules Would Limit Expert Witness Disclosures

By Leyla Mujkic, Hesham M. Sharawy and Daniel J. Herling
June 24, 2009

Rule 26 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure incentivizes a party's attorney to get creative in his efforts to prevent disclosure of his communications with the party's expert, while simultaneously encouraging opposing counsel to engage in creative tactics to discover drafts of expert reports and information otherwise protected from disclosure by the attorney-client privilege and/or the attorney work product doctrine. The results of the rule have been costly and often lead to the discovery of information that is only marginally relevant to any genuine issue in dispute. For example, parties often utilize not only a testifying expert, but also a “consulting expert” during key phases of trial proceedings on the theory that, because the consulting expert will not be designated to testify at trial, he or she is immune from required disclosures. Seasoned experts refuse to draft any reports, opting only for oral representations out of fear that their draft reports will be discoverable.

In an effort to address these and similar results of the current rule, the Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure of the Judicial Conference of the United States has proposed amendments to Rule 26. The proposed amendments seek to extend the attorney-client and attorney-work product protections to attorney-expert communications and to carve out a new category of expert witnesses. This article highlights the major deficiencies with the current rule and discusses how the proposed amendments would redress those deficiencies if enacted.

This premium content is locked for LJN Newsletters subscribers only

  • 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

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
The DOJ's Corporate Enforcement Policy: One Year Later Image

The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.

The DOJ's New Parameters for Evaluating Corporate Compliance Programs Image

The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.

Use of Deferred Prosecution Agreements In White Collar Investigations Image

This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.

Bankruptcy Sales: Finding a Diamond In the Rough Image

There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.

Compliance Officers: Recent Regulatory Guidance and Enforcement Actions and Mitigating the Risk of Personal Liability Image

This article explores legal developments over the past year that may impact compliance officer personal liability.