Parenti et al v. County Of Monterey et al

Filing 92

ORDER ADOPTING 88 MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO GRANT IN PART AND DENY IN PART 76 PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO EXCLUDE NON-RETAINED EXPERTS. Signed by Judge Beth Labson Freeman on 6/6/2017. (blflc1S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/6/2017)

1
2
3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

4

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

5

SAN JOSE DIVISION

6
7

JACOB PARENTI, et al.,
Plaintiffs,

8
9
10
11

v.
COUNTY OF MONTEREY, et al.,
Defendants.

Case No. 14-cv-05481-BLF
ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE
JUDGE’S REPORT AND
RECOMMENDATION TO GRANT IN
PART AND DENY IN PART
PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO EXCLUDE
NON-RETAINED EXPERTS

United States District Court
Northern District of California

[Re: ECF 76, 88]
12
13
14

Before the Court is Magistrate Judge Susan van Keulen’s Report and Recommendation to

15

Grant in Part and Deny in Part Plaintiffs’ Motion to Exclude Non-Retained Experts. R&R, ECF

16

88. No objection to the Report and Recommendation has been filed and the deadline to object has

17

expired. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2) (deadline for objection is fourteen days after being served

18

with report and recommendation).

19

The Report and Recommendation addresses Plaintiffs’ motion to exclude two of the non-

20

retained experts disclosed by Defendants California Forensic Medical Group and Dr. Taylor

21

Fithian (“CFMG Defendants”), which was made as part of a larger motion to exclude heard by this

22

Court on April 27, 2017. See Pl.’s Motion to Exclude, ECF 76. The Court ruled on most aspects

23

of Plaintiffs’ motion in an order issued May 3, 2017, but it referred to Judge van Keulen the issue

24

of whether non-retained experts Julie Kelly and Dr. Delmar Greenleaf should be excluded based

25

on the CFMG Defendants’ failure to comply with the disclosure requirements of Federal Rule of

26

Civil Procedure 26. See Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Plaintiffs’ Motion to Exclude,

27

ECF 87. Judge van Keulen recommends that the Court deny the motion to exclude Kelly and

28

Greenleaf altogether but limit their trial testimony significantly.

1

The Court finds the Report and Recommendation to be correct, well-reasoned, and

2

thorough. Specifically, the Court agrees with Judge van Keulen that the CFMG Defendants’

3

disclosures regarding Kelly and Greenleaf do not comply with Rule 26(a)(2)(C) and that the

4

appropriate remedy is to limit the witnesses’ testimony to the disclosures which were provided.

5

See R&R at 4-5, ECF 88.

6

Accordingly, the Court:

7

(1)

ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation in its entirety; and

8

(2)

LIMITS the trial testimony of Kelly and Greenleaf as set forth in the Report and

9

Recommendation.

10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11

IT IS SO ORDERED.

12
13
14
15

Dated: June 6, 2017
______________________________________
BETH LABSON FREEMAN
United States District Judge

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2