Legal Question in Family Law in Massachusetts

The Pre-trial Hearing is usually the date in which all discovery should be completed, and the nature in which each party will present their case is known. This applies to the disclosure of expert witnesses as well, because the other side needs time to not only question your expert witness, but find an expert of their own (if necessary) to counter your expert's testimony. You'd be surprised how quickly 140 days disappears in an attorney's office, please see Massachusetts District Court Joint Standing Order 1-04: Civil Case Management:

"3. Expert Witnesses.

A party shall identify any person who may be used as an expert witness at trial in advance of the pretrial hearing date. Except as otherwise stipulated or directed by the court, this disclosure shall be accompanied by a written report prepared by the witness. The report shall contain a complete statement of all opinions to be expressed and the basis and reasons therefor; the data or other information considered by the witness in forming the opinions; any exhibits to be used as a summary of or support for the opinions; the qualifications of the witness, including a list of all publications authored by the witness within the preceding five years; the compensation to be paid for the study and testimony; and a listing of any cases in which the witness has testified as a witness at trial or by deposition within the preceding three years."

Also your pre-trial order would have stated that the Expert Witness must be named, and the nature of his testimony must be known. See example:

"(6) (a) The name, address and qualifications of each expert witness the parties intend

to call, together with the subject matter on which the expert is expected to testify,

the substance of all facts and opinions to which the expert is expected to testify

and a detailed summary of the grounds of each expert's opinion. If an expert

witness's identity and expected testimony has previously been disclosed in

response to expert interrogatories, this item may be satisfied by appending to the

pre-trial memorandum a copy of the expert interrogatory responses. Otherwise,

the substance of the expert opinion shall be contained within the pre-trial

memorandum and shall be as detailed as would be expected in an answer to an

expert interrogatory.

(b) Unless earlier resolved, whether any party moves to conduct any expert

deposition under Mass. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(4). If so, unless the parties all agree to

the expert deposition, a written motion to conduct the expert deposition and

opposition shall be appended to the pre-trial memorandum so that the motion may

be decided by the judge at the pre-trial conference.

(c) Whether any party intends to serve any Daubert-Lanigan motion challenging

the admissibility of expert testimony and, if so, when the party intends to serve

and file such a motion and the anticipated basis for such a motion. Failure to

inform the court in the pre-trial memorandum of a party�s intent to file a Daubert-

Lanigan motion may, in the discretion of the court, constitute a waiver of the

motion. If the date proposed for the filing of a Daubert-Lanigan motion is

deemed by the court to be too close to trial, the court may set an earlier deadline

for the filing of the Daubert-Lanigan motion. At the pre-trial conference, the

court will set a date for hearing on any Daubert-Lanigan motion.

NOTE: Inclusion of an expert witness's identity and expected testimony in the

joint pre-trial memorandum does not waive any party's right to object to that

expert's testimony on the ground that responses to expert discovery were untimely

or inadequate."