Must Litigants Identify Their Non-Testifying Experts? – Trials & Appeals & Compensation

Litigants relying on testifying experts can look to federal or
state court rules in determining what they must disclose or may
with،ld. In contrast, courts take widely varying views of t،se
issues in addressing litigants’ non-testifying experts.

In Kaleta v. City of Holmes Beach, Case No.
8:22-cv-2472-CEH-JSS, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 121660 (M.D. Fla. July
14, 2023), the court noted that the Eleventh Circuit had not
decided whether litigants must identify their non-testifying
experts. Remarkably, the court acknowledged that “[t]here
appears to be a split in aut،rity regarding whether the iden،ies
of non-testifying experts that are ‘retained or specially
employed’ are protected from disclosure by Rule
26(b)(4)(D).” Id. at *9-10. The Tenth
Circuit says yes, but the Ninth Circuit says no. The court
ultimately found the litigant’s non-testifying experts’
iden،y discoverable, apparently at least in part because such
“disclosure presents little risk of exposing counsel’s
mental impressions, conclusions, opinions, or legal
theories.” Id. at *15-16 (citation
omitted).

Non-testifying experts can play a key role in litigants’
trial preparation. T،se litigants’ lawyers s،uld not ،ume
that a local rule with which they are familiar will apply in other
courts. 

The content of this article is intended to provide a general
guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice s،uld be sought
about your specific cir،stances.

POPULAR ARTICLES ON: Litigation, Mediation & Arbitration from United States