Valencia v. United States of America
ORDER. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Jason B Libby) Parties notified.(mserpa, 2)
United States District Court
Southern District of Texas
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION
ROBERT LEE VALENCIA
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
October 31, 2017
David J. Bradley, Clerk
CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:16-CV-85
Plaintiff has been treated by Dr. Dennis Gutzman. During his deposition, Dr.
Gutzman provided testimony about whether or not treatment received by Plaintiff from
other medical providers was reasonable and necessary and whether the costs associated
with that treatment was reasonable and necessary. Defendant objected to this testimony
because Dr. Gutzman has been designated as a treating physician, not as a retained
expert, and has not satisfied the disclosure requirements of Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 26(a)(2), particularly a written expert report.
Plaintiff responds that Dr.
Gutzman is a non-retained expert because he is Plaintiff’s treating physician and is
therefore not required to provide an expert report.
The Court finds Dr. Gutzman has been properly designated as a non-retained
expert to testify regarding his own treatment of Plaintiff. However, any testimony by Dr.
Gutzman regarding Plaintiff’s treatment by other medical providers is clearly outside the
scope of his own treatment and therefore, does not qualify under the treating physician
exception to Rule 26(a)(2). See Beard v. Harris Cty., No. H-04-1982, 2005 WL 6734078
(S.D. Tex. Feb. 16, 2005). The Court is not making any decision regarding whether Dr.
Gutzman is qualified to testify regarding Plaintiff’s treatment by other medical providers.
Rather, the Court finds Dr. Gutzman has not been properly designated as an expert in this
case to provide such testimony.
ORDERED this 31st day of October, 2017.
Jason B. Libby
United States Magistrate Judge
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?