X

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
http://nycourts.law.com/CourtDocumentViewer.asp?view=Document&docID=46286 Judge Holwell A LATEX glove product liability action was one of many cases consolidated for pre-trial discovery. Plaintiffs objected to part of a magistrate judge’s order that states “should plaintiffs desire to elicit case-specific expert testimony from [an expert witness], as contemplated by the Multi-District Litigation (MDL) Remand Order,” they must comply fully with Rule 26(a)(2)(B) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Rule 26(a)(2)(B) directs parties who retain an expert witness to provide a written report of the expected expert testimony, including the bases for the testimony and credentials. Plaintiffs argued that the report submitted by the witness satisfies the rule because the order does not explain how the report is deficient. The instant court found that the order was not erroneous, ruling that MDL consolidation would be poorly served if parties were forced to engage in duplicative discovery on expert evidentiary matters that were already the subject of discovery during the MDL proceedings.

Want to continue reading?
Become a Free ALM Digital Reader.

Benefits of a Digital Membership:

  • Free access to 3 articles* every 30 days
  • Access to the entire ALM network of websites
  • Unlimited access to the ALM suite of newsletters
  • Build custom alerts on any search topic of your choosing
  • Search by a wide range of topics

*May exclude premium content
Already have an account?

 
 

ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2020 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.