Brian D. Chase


Don’t designate an “inexpert” expert


The restrictions on improperly designated experts are positively Draconian. A look at the most common errors made in expert-witness designation — and how to avoid them


Despite a plethora of developing con-


temporary authorities governing proper expert-witness designations, the number of fatal errors made even by large firms and experienced practitioners as part of their clients’ expert-witness designations continues to prove astonishing. The courts have developed relatively


Draconian restrictions on use of testimo- ny of improperly and/or insufficiently designated expert witnesses, to compel strict compliance with the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure (herein C.C.P.) section 2034.010, et seq. These


40— The Advocate Magazine JULY 2011


measures support judicial policy placing heightened importance on simultaneous, full, and fair expert disclosure to aid effi- cient trial preparedness and promote set- tlements. As explained by our Supreme Court in Bonds v. Roy (1999) 20 Cal.4th 140, 83 Cal.Rptr.2d 289: The very purpose of the expert wit-


ness discovery statute is to give fair notice of what an expert will say at trial. This allows the parties to assess whether to take the expert’s deposition, to fully explore the relevant subject area at any such deposition, and to select an expert


who can respond with a competing opinion on that subject area. ‘The opportunity to depose an expert during trial, particularly if the testimony relates to a central issue, often provides a whol- ly inadequate opportunity to under- stand the expert’s opinion and to pre- pare to meet it. [Citations.]’ (Kennedy & Martin, Cal. Expert Witness Guide, supra, § 10.18, at p. 267.) “[T]he need for pretrial discovery is greater with respect to expert witnesses than it is for


See Expert, Page 42


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102  |  Page 103  |  Page 104