Carver v. Ross

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• recognizing that declarations containing merits-related expert testimony filed after disclosures were due pursuant to a court’s scheduling order and/or Rule 26(a)(2) would lead to unjust results
• finding that preclusion of doctor’s declaration was the appropriate remedy notwithstanding the potential importance of the declaration where the exclusion resulted wholly from the plaintiff's own failures
• finding a motion for discovery sanctions untimely due to the age of the matter, the delay in bringing the motion, and the fact that the information at issue was not newly discovered
• finding a motion for discovery sanctions untimely due to the age of the matter, the delay in bringing the motion, and the fact that the information at issue was not newly discovered
• finding a motion for discovery sanctions untimely due to the age of the matter, the delay in bringing the motion, and the fact that the information at issue was not newly discovered
• excluding expert report submitted in opposition to summary judgment motion where report was “designed to fill a significant and logical gap” in past reports and served more than a year after initial disclosures were due

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).