The following blog entry is written to illustrate a common motion filed during the pre-trial stage of civil litigation. Reviewing this kind of briefing should help potential plaintiffs and clients better understand how parties in personal injury cases present such issues to the court.
(Please also note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this brain injury case and its proceedings.)
DEFENDANTS CLAIM OF PREJUDICE IS COMPLETELY WITHOUT MERIT BECAUSE PLAINTIFF HAS SUBMITTED TO DEFENSE MENTAL EXAMINATIONS AND DR. BROWN HAS BEEN DEPOSED BY THE DEFENSE
Code of Civil Procedure § 2034.300 governs the exclusion of expert testimony in order to avoid any prejudice to an adverse party. The court may only exclude an expert from testifying if the party designating him “unreasonably” fails to (a) List that witness as an expert ; (b) submit an expert declaration; (c) produce reports and writings; or (d) make the expert available for deposition. For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.
Plaintiff has clearly and undeniably complied with all of these requirements in naming Dr. Brown in a supplemental designation. As the defense medical reports show, Plaintiff has in fact submitted to two defense mental examinations – one by defense expert Mike Hall, M.D., and two days of intense mental testing by defense expert Robert Lee, Ph.D. Defendants concede that they have conducted a thorough deposition of Dr. Brown. Nowhere do the defendants specify what prejudice they would suffer by Dr. Brown’s testimony and their complaint of prejudice is simply made of whole cloth. Even if defendants could elucidate some prejudicial effect, any potential for prejudice is easily avoided by defendants’ companion Kennemur motion in limine to limit any expert’s testimony to what was disclosed in plaintiffs designation and deposition.
Accordingly there is simply no factual or legal basis to exclude Dr. Brown’s expert testimony. Defendants’ motion in limine to exclude expert opinion testimony by Dr. Brown must be denied as a matter of procedural law.
For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.