Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

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

The Propriety of Allowing Rebuttal Experts

By James R. Moncus III and Kathleen Bowers
July 31, 2012

Although the concept of rebuttal is simple, it is rarely so in practice. After the defense rests, most jurisdictions allow the plaintiff the opportunity to rebut new points introduced to the jury during the defendant's case. Courts unanimously agree that the decision to allow an expert to testify on rebuttal is a discretionary one, and we shall examine here the factors courts consider when determining the propriety of permitting a rebuttal expert witness to testify. There are few appellate decisions tackling the issue of rebuttal experts systematically; this is simply not a well-developed area of the law. Nevertheless, a survey of decisions around the country yields key insights regarding the considerations every trial lawyer must make when assessing the propriety of offering a rebuttal witness (as a plaintiff), or filing a motion to strike such a witness (as a defendant).

Despite the lack of consistency in reported cases considering whether to allow rebuttal experts, there is a general agreement on at least one proposition: Where an expert has been properly disclosed prior to trial, it is almost always an abuse of discretion for the court to deny the plaintiff an opportunity to present a rebuttal expert, at least where the proffered testimony is non-cumulative. One state appellate court has even recognized rebuttal testimony as a “matter of right” where new facts are introduced during the opponent's case. Teller v. Schepens, 518 N.E.2d 868, 870 (Mass. App. Ct. 1988). On the other hand, no such right exists to present rebuttal evidence for the sole purpose of supporting a party's affirmative case. Id. Accordingly, most courts agree that the purpose of rebuttal expert testimony is to address new matters brought during the defense's case-in-chief rather than to “bolster the plaintiff's case-in-chief.” Id. at 871. In the absence of timely disclosure, however, courts have applied various factors in reaching conclusions regarding the admissibility of rebuttal experts.

This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance 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
Law Firms are Reducing Redundant Real Estate by Bringing Support Services Back to the Office Image

A trend analysis of the benefits and challenges of bringing back administrative, word processing and billing services to law offices.

Bit Parts Image

Summary Judgment Denied Defendant in Declaratory Action by Producer of To Kill a Mockingbird Broadway Play Seeking Amateur Theatrical Rights

Risks of “Baseball Arbitration” in Resolving Real Estate Disputes Image

“Baseball arbitration” refers to the process used in Major League Baseball in which if an eligible player's representative and the club ownership cannot reach a compensation agreement through negotiation, each party enters a final submission and during a formal hearing each side — player and management — presents its case and then the designated panel of arbitrators chooses one of the salary bids with no other result being allowed. This method has become increasingly popular even beyond the sport of baseball.

Disconnect Between In-House and Outside Counsel Image

'Disconnect Between In-House and Outside Counsel is a continuation of the discussion of client expectations and the disconnect that often occurs. And although the outside attorneys should be pursuing how inside-counsel actually think, inside counsel should make an effort to impart this information without waiting to be asked.

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.