Watson Carpet & Floor Covering, Inc. v. Mohawk Industries, Inc. et al

Filing 250

ORDER granting 98 Motion for leave to file a reply brief in support of its motion for leave to add expert. Mohawk may disclose any additional expert witness on the issue of Watson's damages and serve an expert witness report on or before O ctober 17, 2013. If Mohawk designates such an expert, Watson shall have until Thursday, November 14, 2013, within which it may designate a responding expert witness on this issue and serve its report. The parties may depose any additional expert witnesses so designated on or before Friday, December 13, 2013. It is so ORDERED. Signed by Magistrate Judge John S. Bryant on 9/18/13. (DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(tmw)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
NASHVILLE DIVISION
WATSON CARPET & FLOOR COVERING,
INC.,

)
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
MOHAWK INDUSTRIES, INC., et al., )
)
Defendants
)

No. 3:09-0487
Judge Sharp/Bryant
Jury Demand

O R D E R
Defendant Mohawk has filed its Motion for Leave to Add
Expert to Respond to Plaintiff’s Damages Calculations (Docket Entry
No. 92). Plaintiff Watson has responded in opposition (Docket Entry
No. 96). Thereafter, Mohawk has filed a motion for leave to file a
reply brief in support of its motion for leave to add expert
(Docket Entry 98). This latter motion is GRANTED, and the reply has
been considered by the undersigned.
For the reasons stated below, the undersigned Magistrate
Judge GRANTS Mohawk’s motion for leave to add an expert witness
regarding Watson’s calculation of damages.
As grounds for its motion, Mohawk alleges that, despite
its best efforts to obtain timely discovery of the facts and
rationale underlying Watson’s damages claim, Watson failed to
produce such discovery until after Mohawk’s deadline for disclosing
its expert witnesses, thereby depriving Mohawk of the ability to
disclose an expert witness to testify about Watson’s damages
calculations.

In

its

response,

Watson

argues

that

(1)

the

information necessary to support its damages claim was within the
possession of Mohawk and Mohawk failed to produce it in discovery,
(2) that Watson therefore was required to obtain this information
from nonparties Carpet Den and Metro Carpets, and (3) Watson’s
damages claim is based upon a simple arithmetic computation and,
therefore, Mohawk does not need an expert witness.
Although the parties hotly dispute where any blame should
be laid, it does appear to be undisputed that discovery responses
relating to Watson’s damages claim were not served until long after
deadlines for disclosing expert witnesses had expired. It further
appears that the District Judge has recently granted Mohawk’s
motion to continue the trial date and that no new trial date has
yet been set.
From all of the foregoing, the undersigned Magistrate
Judge finds that Mohawk’s motion for leave to add an expert witness
regarding the calculation of Plaintiff’s damages should be GRANTED,
and that if Mohawk designates a new expert witness, Watson,
thereafter, should be GRANTED an opportunity to disclose a rebuttal
expert, if it wishes to do so.
Mohawk may disclose any additional expert witness on the
issue of Watson’s damages and serve an expert witness report on or
before October 17, 2013. If Mohawk designates such an expert,
Watson shall have until Thursday, November 14, 2013, within which
it may designate a responding expert witness on this issue and
2

serve its report. The parties may depose any additional expert
witnesses so designated on or before Friday, December 13, 2013.
It is so ORDERED.
/s/ John S. Bryant
JOHN S. BRYANT
United States Magistrate Judge

3