Weiner v. Kneller

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that there was no surprise or prejudice because appellees had the opportunity to depose appellant’s expert and had every reason to be prepared to address the issues and did not seek a continuance
• explaining that a preponderance of the prescribed factors must be satisfied before expert testimony omitted from a Rule 26(b)(4) statement may be allowed
• noting that responsive testimony is allowed if it is consistent with the expert’s original theory
• “[Ajbuse may only be found where the trial judge has imposed ‘a penalty too strict or unnecessary under the circumstances.’”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).