Tacoma Ry. & Power Co. v. Geiger

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that, while “the Rules do not require in every case that a complete and unchangeable damages computation be presented at the outset of the case,” the “key inquiry” for purposes of Rule 26(e
• collecting cases declining to exclude evidence when any prejudice from late disclosure can be remedied through a short extension of discovery
• “The level of specificity for the damages computation varies 20 depending on the stage of the litigation and the claims at issue” (emphasis added)
• ‘Absent a showing of bad faith or other misconduct, courts are leery of imposing 13] the harsh sanction of exclusion absent a significant possibility of preyudice.”
• “The purposes of the initial disclosure requirements are important and clear. Parties should be put on notice of the factual and legal contentions of the opposing party”
• “There is no bright line rule that such 20 supplementation [a damages calculation] is improper if made after the expert disclosure deadline 21 or even after the close of discovery.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).