Kerns v. Pro-Foam of South Alabama, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• finding no undue benefit, as testifying expert reports and opinions do not “belong to one party or another”
• finding no undue benefit because once a person has given testimony through an expert report, that report and opinion does not “belong to one party or another, but rather [is] available for all parties to use at trial”
• failure of plaintiff 40 Case: 12-14502 Date Filed: 09/11/2014 Page: 41 of 41 to disclose defendant’s expert as its own expert did not prevent plaintiff from calling that expert during its case-in-chief
• “Neither the parties’ 9 briefs nor the Court’s own research reveals any per se rule forbidding a party from calling 10 an adversary's expert during his case-in-chief.”
• “Courts have repeatedly observed that once a party has given testimony through deposition or expert reports, those opinions do not ‘belong’ to one party or another, but rather are available for all parties to use at trial____”
• “ ‘The rules governing expert disclosures are intended to shield litigants from unfair surprise, not to be used by opportunistic litigants as a sword to strike down witnesses whose identities and proposed testimony have been known to them from the outset of the lawsuit’ ”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).