Legal Opinion

Coleman v. Dydula

District Court, W.D. New York

Decided September 8, 1999No. 96-CV-244C(H)PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

DECISION AND ORDER

HECKMAN, United States Magistrate Judge.

Defendants move to preclude plaintiffs’ expert witnesses, Ronald Reiber, Ph.D., and Herbert Weber, for failure to comply with Rule 26 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (Item 51). Plaintiffs oppose the motion, and request an extension of time in which to file Herbert Weber’s expert report (Item 56, H 124).

For the reasons set forth below, defendants’ motion is granted in part and denied in part. Plaintiffs are precluded from introducing the testimony of their vocational expert, Herbert Weber, because they failed to comply with this…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Van Nguyen v. IBP, Inc.District Court, D. Kansas · 1995
  2. Hilt v. SFC Inc.District Court, D. Kansas · 1997
  3. Coleman v. DydulaDistrict Court, W.D. New York · 1997
  4. Majewski v. Southland Corp.District Court, D. Kansas · 1996

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Loeffel Steel Products, Inc. v. Delta Brands, Inc.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 2005
  2. Carlson v. FerrisColorado Court of Appeals · 2002
  3. Zollinger v. Owens-Brockway Glass Container, Inc.District Court, N.D. New York · 2002
  4. Jennings v. ThompsonDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2011
  5. Carlson v. FerrisColorado Court of Appeals · 2002

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API