The plaintiffs in a construction defect action brought a mid-trial motion for leave to file additional and supplemental expert reports.
The plaintiffs sought to introduce a new structural engineering expert to address an allegation of bias raised against their original expert shortly before trial, and to file a supplemental report addressing newly discovered cracks.
The court dismissed the motion, finding that granting leave would cause undue delay and prejudice to the defendants, who would not have sufficient time to obtain responding reports before the trial resumed.
The court also noted that the plaintiffs failed to provide an adequate explanation for the delay in seeking leave.
