Full access allows:
- Solve all tests online without limits;
- Remove all advertisements on website;
- Adding questions to favorite list;
- Save learning progress;
- Save results of practice exams;
- Watching all wrong answered questions.
48. Is the court likely to intervene and compel disclosures from the agent?
During discovery, six months before trial was set to begin, the baseball player asked the court to intervene and compel the agent to disclose whether he intends to call any other expert witnesses with respect to the same issue.
A baseball player sued an agent in federal court in State A for breach of contract. The agent argued that the contract between the player and the agent was severed due to extensive injuries that the player sustained. In accordance with his duty to disclose, the agent stated that he intended to call Dr. Jones as an expert witness to testify about the extensive injuries that the baseball player suffered.
Comments (0)
There are no comments at the moment. If you found an error or think question is incorrect, tell everyone about it
Only signed in users can write comments
Signin
FRCP 26(b)(4) addresses how discovery works for expert witnesses. When a party wishes to call an expert witness to testify at trial, it must furnish a list identifying any of these witnesses automatically at least 90 days prior to trial.
The party who intends to call an expert witness must have the expert prepare and sign a report containing:
(i) all of the expert's opinions, and the basis for them;
(ii) the facts or data considered by the expert in forming those opinions;
(iii) any exhibits;
(iv) relevant qualifications;
(v) compensation received; AND
(vi) a listing of any other cases for which the expert witness has testified within the preceding four years.
There is a duty to supplement one's prior disclosures. Any mandatory and automatic disclosure required under FRCP 26(a) must be supplemented or corrected in a timely manner if the party learns that in some material respect the disclosure or response is incomplete or incorrect, and if the additional or corrective information has otherwise not been made known to the other parties during the discovery process or in writing.
D is correct. Pursuant to the FRCP, parties must disclose to the other parties the identity of any witness that the party intends to use at trial as evidence. This happens both through initial disclosures and supplementary disclosures, which happen throughout discovery until trial. There is a duty to amend or supplement disclosures when the party realizes that in some material respect, the disclosure is incomplete or incorrect.
Here, because the parties are still in the discovery phase and the information regarding additional witnesses is still unknown, the baseball player will likely have to wait for the agent to make additional supplementary disclosures before the court will intervene and compel disclosures from the agent.
A is incorrect. The baseball player is only entitled to this information prior to trial, not months beforehand through a court order. It would be improper for the court to intervene to allow the player to submit an interrogatory to the agent for information that should be disclosed during the normal course of discovery. There is no need for the player to submit an interrogatory.
B is incorrect. As stated above, the baseball player is only entitled to this information prior to trial, not months beforehand through a court order. It would be improper for the court to intervene to allow the player to subpoena the agent for a deposition to ask about information that should be disclosed during the normal course of discovery. There is no need for the player to subpoena the agent for a deposition.
C is incorrect. Any witness that is to be called to testify at trial will need to be identified at least 90 days before the trial begins. The baseball player would never have to wait until trial to find out if there are any other expert witnesses being called.