Gorrell v. Sneath et al
Filing
72
ORDER DEFERRING Plaintiff's Motion to Allow His Expert to Testify at Trial Via Telephone or Video Conference; ORDER REQUIRING Rule 26 Expert Disclosure, signed by Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston on 7/29/2013. Motion Deferred 71 . (Hall, S)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
WILSON GORRELL,
Plaintiff,
12
v.
13
14
THOMAS SNEATH, et al.,
15
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No.: 1:12-cv-0554 - JLT
ORDER DEFERRING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION
TO ALLOW HIS EXPERT TO TESTIFY AT
TRIAL VIA TELEPHONE ORVIDEO
CONFERENCE; ORDER REQUIRING RULE 26
EXPERT DISCLOSURE
(Doc. 71)
16
On July 25, 2013, Plaintiff filed a request to allow his expert to testify via telephone or video
17
18
conference at trial. (Doc. 71) Permitting this type of testimony may be permitted but notably, Plaintiff
19
has not properly disclosed an expert. The fact he has provided a letter from one doctor and an un-
20
signed page of notes from another does not comply with Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2). Therefore, the Court
21
will not decide at this time whether testimony should be allowed in this fashion. Instead, the Court
22
ORDERS:
1.
23
No later than August 23, 2013, Plaintiff SHALL disclose his expert to Defendants and
24
to file the disclosure with the Court. This disclosure SHALL comply with Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2).
25
Assuming this occurs, Defendants SHALL complete expert discovery no later than September 20,
26
2013;1
27
28
1
In the event Plaintiff’s disclosure requires Defendants to disclose a rebuttal expert, Defendants may file a request to do so
no later than September 6, 2013.
1
1
2
2.
The determination of Plaintiff’s request for his expert to testify at trial via telephone or
video-conference is DEFERRED until Plaintiff makes his compliant expert disclosure.
3
4
5
6
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
July 29, 2013
/s/ Jennifer L. Thurston
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?