§Why CasetextPricing

Beyond Systems, Inc. v. World Avenue USA, LLC et al

RESPONSE in Opposition re MOTION for Determination and Sufficiency of Plaintiff's Initial Expert Disclosures, and/or for Extension of Time And Cross-Motion to Exclude Plaintiff's Expert Witnesses

23 Cited authorities

  1. Pioneer Investment Services Company v. Brunswick Associates Limited Partnership

    507 U.S. 380 (1993)   Cited 7,925 times   14 Legal Analyses
    Holding that clients must be held accountable for the acts and omissions of their attorneys

  2. Wesolek ex rel. Estate of Wesolek v. Canadair Ltd.

    838 F.2d 55 (2d Cir. 1988)   Cited 2,558 times
    In Wesolek, an attorney requested an extension of the deadline for filing objections, beyond the deadline for filing such objections, on the grounds that he had been on vacation: "The motion stated that Slater had been in Florida when the magistrate's report was received in his office, that his partner had only 'limited familiarity' with defendants' motion to dismiss, and that Slater had been occupied with other business since his return from Florida." Id., 838 F.2d at 57.

  3. Nourison Rug Corp. v. Parvizian

    535 F.3d 295 (4th Cir. 2008)   Cited 616 times
    Holding that "after the deadlines provided by scheduling order have passed, the good cause standard must be satisfied to justify leave to amend the pleadings."

  4. Southern States Rack & Fixture, Inc. v. Sherwin-Williams Co.

    318 F.3d 592 (4th Cir. 2003)   Cited 728 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that opponent of evidence was "surprised" by expert opinion provided in untimely supplemental report because, prior to submission of supplemental report, expert had stated in his deposition that "he had completed his opinions"

  5. Thompson v. E.I. DuPont de Nemours Co.

    76 F.3d 530 (4th Cir. 1996)   Cited 332 times
    Holding in a civil case that "[t]he most important of the factors identified in Pioneer for determining whether neglect is excusable is the reason for the [delay]"

  6. Carr v. Deeds

    453 F.3d 593 (4th Cir. 2006)   Cited 181 times
    Holding that excessive force is "the sort [of force] repugnant to the conscience of mankind"

  7. Saudi v. Northrop Grumman Corp.

    427 F.3d 271 (4th Cir. 2005)   Cited 177 times
    Holding that exclusion of evidence was an appropriate sanction for a party's failure to timely provide expert witness disclosures and admonishing that "[l]itigants who fail to comply with court scheduling and discovery orders should not expect courts of appeal to save them from the consequences of their own delinquence"

  8. Rassoull v. Maximus, Inc.

    209 F.R.D. 372 (D. Md. 2002)   Cited 136 times
    Finding no good cause in part because the plaintiff "never addresses the issue of tardiness in the motion itself"

  9. Sullivan v. Glock, Inc.

    175 F.R.D. 497 (D. Md. 1997)   Cited 115 times
    Holding in context of retained expert witnesses that "[c]ounsel must be prepared to provide full and meaningful disclosure and discovery at the times required by the . . . pretrial scheduling order."

  10. McLaughlin v. City of LaGrange

    662 F.2d 1385 (11th Cir. 1982)   Cited 131 times
    Finding that a busy practice as a solo practitioner in itself is not excusable neglect

  11. Rule 26 - Duty to Disclose; General Provisions Governing Discovery

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 26   Cited 99,217 times   679 Legal Analyses
    Adopting Fed.R.Civ.P. 37

  12. Rule 6 - Computing and Extending Time; Time for Motion Papers

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 6   Cited 50,999 times   24 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "if the last day [of a period] is a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday, the period continues to run until the end of the next day that is not a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday."

  13. Rule 37 - Failure to Make Disclosures or to Cooperate in Discovery; Sanctions

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 37   Cited 47,664 times   331 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a party may be barred from using a witness if it fails to disclose the witness

  14. Rule 16 - Pretrial Conferences; Scheduling; Management

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 16   Cited 35,128 times   55 Legal Analyses
    Adopting the sanctions authorized by Rule 37(b)

  15. Rule 702 - Testimony by Expert Witnesses

    Fed. R. Evid. 702   Cited 27,535 times   280 Legal Analyses
    Adopting the Daubert standard

  16. Rule 703 - Bases of an Expert's Opinion Testimony

    Fed. R. Evid. 703   Cited 4,900 times   27 Legal Analyses
    Explaining that facts or data of a type upon which experts in the field would reasonably rely in forming an opinion need not be admissible in order for the expert's opinion based on the facts and data to be admitted