Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Supreme Court of Texas hears dispute over excluded expert testimony in Diamond Hydraulics case
Summary
At oral argument in Diamond Hydraulics v. GAC Equipment, counsel for Diamond Hydraulics defended the trial court's exclusion of late-designated expert testimony under Texas discovery rules, while opposing counsel pressed that alternatives such as depositions or remote testimony could have cured any prejudice.
At oral argument before the Supreme Court of Texas, counsel for Diamond Hydraulics (Speaker 1) told the justices the trial court did not abuse its discretion when it excluded expert testimony that was designated well past the court's deadline. "We think that there are 3 major errors that require reversal," Speaker 1 said, identifying exclusion of expert proof and related due-process concerns as central issues.
Speaker 1 urged the court that the excluded testimony was the product of litigation choices by Diamond Hydraulics, not circumstances beyond the party's control: "This case was about a party that repeatedly failed to comply with the deadline to designate experts," Speaker 1 said, arguing that strategic decisions not to take deposition testimony or to decline offered remote testimony did not constitute "good cause" under Rule 193.6 and the court's Alvarado…
Already have an account? Log in
Subscribe to keep reading
Unlock the rest of this article — and every article on Citizen Portal.
- Unlimited articles
- AI-powered breakdowns of topics, speakers, decisions, and budgets
- Instant alerts when your location has a new meeting
- Follow topics and more locations
- 1,000 AI Insights / month, plus AI Chat
