Sirleaf v. Wall

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that “ ‘experts should be allowed to pursue their trade, and parties should be permitted to select their own experts’ ”
• observing that Rule 26(a)(2)(B) “was amended in 2010 to . . . [make] clear that disclosure of theories or mental impressions of counsel is not required”
• declining to disqualify expert and instead striking references to confidential information in expert’s report where expert did not actively consider or rely upon that information in forming his opinion
• noting, with Rule 26(a)(2) and the 2010 Amendment, “[t]he committee urged that the phrase ‘facts or data’ was to be interpreted broadly and include any facts or data considered by the expert, not only those relied upon”
• “The disclosure requirements prevent putting counsel in a position where he or she must depose an expert without an understanding as to what the expert will testify.”
• facts and data that expert saw but did not use “‘often contain effective ammunition for cross-examination’”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).