Filed: Sep. 04, 2019
Latest Update: Sep. 04, 2019
Summary: RULING AND ORDER ERIN WILDER-DOOMES , Magistrate Judge . Before the Court is a Motion to Suspend Delays for Filing Expert Witness Reports (the "Motion"), 1 filed by defendant Kyle Ardoin, in his official capacity as Secretary of State ("Defendant"). Although the deadline for filing an opposition has not yet passed, Defendant asserts that "Plaintiffs' counsel were consulted and indicated that they oppose this motion." 2 Per the Motion, Defendant requests that this Court (1) suspend the de
Summary: RULING AND ORDER ERIN WILDER-DOOMES , Magistrate Judge . Before the Court is a Motion to Suspend Delays for Filing Expert Witness Reports (the "Motion"), 1 filed by defendant Kyle Ardoin, in his official capacity as Secretary of State ("Defendant"). Although the deadline for filing an opposition has not yet passed, Defendant asserts that "Plaintiffs' counsel were consulted and indicated that they oppose this motion." 2 Per the Motion, Defendant requests that this Court (1) suspend the del..
More
RULING AND ORDER
ERIN WILDER-DOOMES, Magistrate Judge.
Before the Court is a Motion to Suspend Delays for Filing Expert Witness Reports (the "Motion"),1 filed by defendant Kyle Ardoin, in his official capacity as Secretary of State ("Defendant"). Although the deadline for filing an opposition has not yet passed, Defendant asserts that "Plaintiffs' counsel were consulted and indicated that they oppose this motion."2 Per the Motion, Defendant requests that this Court (1) suspend the delays for filing experts reports until a scheduling order has been entered; and (2) grant Defendant an extension "for a period of 90 days from receipt" of Plaintiffs' expert witness reports submitted on August 16, 17, and 26, 2019.3
Defendant asserts that he "is concerned" that Plaintiffs' submission of "partial expert witness reports on August 16, 2019, exhibits for the reports on August 17, 2019 and information, facts and data underlying the report in usable form on August 26, 2019," triggered Defendant's 30-day deadline set forth in FRCP 26(a)(2)(D)(ii).4 Defendant contends that he is "still interviewing witnesses and gathering information needed to defend this case"5 and that [a]t least one of the defense experts has indicated that he will be unable to provide an expert report within 30 days."6
As this Court has found good cause exists to defer entry of a scheduling order in this case,7 any applicable deadlines arise pursuant to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and this Court's Local Civil Rules. Pursuant to FRCP 26(a)(2)(D), absent a stipulation or court order, a party must disclose expert testimony "(i) at least 90 days before the date set for trial or for the case to be ready for trial; or (ii) if the evidence is intended solely to contradict or rebut evidence on the same subject matter identified by another party under Rule 26(a)(2)(B) or (C), within 30 days after the other party's disclosure."
It is not clear that FRCP 26(a)(2)(D)(ii) would be applicable, as it is not clear that Defendant's expert reports are strictly rebuttal reports. However, to avoid future confusion, the Court finds good cause to extend the deadline of FRCP 26(a)(2)(D)(ii) by 45 days, considering that no scheduling order is currently in place, as well as Defendant's representation that one of his experts will be unable to provide an expert report within 30 days of receipt of the information underlying Plaintiffs' expert reports.8
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Motion to Suspend Delays for Filing Expert Witness Reports9 is GRANTED IN PART. With respect to the deadline set forth in FRCP 26(a)(2)(D)(ii) as to Plaintiffs' expert reports submitted on August 16, 17, and 26, 2019, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant is granted an extension through October 10, 2019 to provide rebuttal reports.
