Mashelia Gibson v. Maryland Motor Vehicle Administration

Summary

The United States District Court for the District of Maryland granted the Maryland Motor Vehicle Administration’s motion to strike and exclude the de bene esse deposition testimony of Plaintiff’s handwriting expert, Wendy Carlson. The court held that the opinions offered at deposition were not disclosed in the expert report and that the nondisclosure was neither substantially justified nor harmless under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 26 and 37.

Holdings

1. An expert may not offer at trial opinions that were not disclosed in the expert's report or in a required supplemental or rebuttal report.
2. Exclusion was warranted because the plaintiff's failure to disclose the additional expert opinions was neither substantially justified nor harmless.
3. The plaintiff may generally testify about how she writes and what she did or did not write, but may not offer testimony requiring specialized knowledge of handwriting analysis.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the plaintiff's handwriting expert's de bene esse deposition testimony should be excluded because it disclosed opinions not contained in the expert's report.
2. Whether the plaintiff's failure to supplement or provide a rebuttal expert report was substantially justified or harmless under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37(c)(1).
3. Whether the plaintiff could testify about her own handwriting and writing conduct without offering specialized handwriting-analysis opinions.

Disposition

other