From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Foster v. Cotton States Mut. Ins. Co.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA OCALA DIVISION
Apr 1, 2013
Case No: 5:12-CV-150-Oc-34PRL (M.D. Fla. Apr. 1, 2013)

Opinion

Case No: 5:12-CV-150-Oc-34PRL

04-01-2013

SHEILA FOSTER, Plaintiff, v. COTTON STATES MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY Defendant.


ORDER

On April 1, 2013, this Court held a hearing on Defendant's Motion to Strike Plaintiff's Experts for Failure to Comply with Rule 26 and Motion in Limine to Prevent Plaintiff's Experts from Testifying at Trial (Doc. 27). Defendant seeks to strike all of Plaintiff's experts because of Plaintiff's failure to comply with Rule 26(a)(2), Fed. R. Civ. P. For the reasons stated, and as set forth, on the record at the hearing, which are incorporated by reference, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED that:

1. Defendant's Motion (Doc. 27) is DENIED as MOOT to the extent that Defendant seeks to strike Mr. George Zobrist and Mr. Dennis James because Plaintiff represented that she does not intend to call either of these witnesses at trial.
2. Defendant's Motion (Doc. 27) is DENIED to the extent that Defendant seek to strike the testimony of Mr. James Funderburk. In addition, on or before April 22, 2013, Defendant may disclose a rebuttal expert if Defendant deems one necessary.
3. Defendant's Motion (Doc. 27) is DENIED to the extent that Defendant seeks to strike Mr. Sonny Gulati, P.E. However, on or before April 8, 2013, Plaintiff shall comply with Rule 26(a)(2)(B)(v), Fed. R. Civ. P., by providing Defendant with additional information regarding the cases that Mr. Gulati testified in during the last four years sufficient for Defendant to be able to identify those cases and investigate them. In addition, on or before April 22, 2013, Defendant may re-depose Mr. Gulati on his prior testimony. The Court will DEFER ruling on whether Plaintiff should pay for a second deposition of Mr. Gulati.
4. Lastly, to the extent Defendant seeks to limit the trial testimony of Mr. Gulati or any other expert, the Motion in Limine is denied without prejudice as premature at this time. If such a motion remains appropriate it should be filed consistent with the Amended Case Management and Scheduling Order (Doc. 25).

If Defendant seeks to have Plaintiff pay for the second deposition of Mr. Gulati, Defendant should file an appropriate motion and state grounds demonstrating that Defendant is entitled to Plaintiff bearing the costs.

DONE and ORDERED in Ocala, Florida on April 1, 2013.

_______________

PHILIP R. LAMMENS

United States Magistrate Judge
Copies furnished to:

Counsel of Record


Summaries of

Foster v. Cotton States Mut. Ins. Co.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA OCALA DIVISION
Apr 1, 2013
Case No: 5:12-CV-150-Oc-34PRL (M.D. Fla. Apr. 1, 2013)
Case details for

Foster v. Cotton States Mut. Ins. Co.

Case Details

Full title:SHEILA FOSTER, Plaintiff, v. COTTON STATES MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA OCALA DIVISION

Date published: Apr 1, 2013

Citations

Case No: 5:12-CV-150-Oc-34PRL (M.D. Fla. Apr. 1, 2013)

Citing Cases

Vehse v. Liberty Mut. Fire Ins. Co.

In addition, the Court observes that another court has found Gulati to be qualified as an expert in a similar…