Besiso v. Barnes
- Ronnie Abrams
- 1:16-cv-09461
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Besiso v. Barnes, Judge Abrams granted plaintiffs’ request to substitute a deceased expert and extended discovery to March 4, 2022.
The order directly affected plaintiffs Myron Powell and Jasmine Besiso by allowing additional time to find a substitute neurological expert; it also extended the discovery period applicable to the case.
What happened
In Besiso v. Barnes, Myron Powell and Jasmine Besiso asked to replace their designated neurological expert, Dr. Igor Stiler, after learning that he had died.
The plaintiffs said the circumstances were unexpected and outside their control, and that they were working to find a replacement. They argued that defendants would not be prejudiced because no trial date or dispositive motions had been set, while the plaintiffs would be harmed without live expert testimony.
Judge Ronnie Abrams found good cause to extend the discovery deadline and granted the application. She extended discovery to March 4, 2022, so the plaintiffs could find a substitute neurological expert.
The detailed version
- Besiso v. Barnes · No. 1:16-cv-09461
- Ronnie Abrams
- Jan. 6, 2022
Background
Plaintiffs Myron Powell and Jasmine Besiso asked the court for permission to substitute their designated trial expert, Dr. Igor Stiler. According to the request, the plaintiffs learned on January 3, 2022, that Dr. Stiler had died and therefore could not testify. The plaintiffs had not yet identified a replacement expert.
Parties’ Position
The plaintiffs argued that replacing the expert required a showing of good cause under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16(b). They relied on cases recognizing good cause when an expert becomes unavailable because of an unforeseeable health-related event or death, particularly when the requesting party has acted diligently. The plaintiffs stated that dispositive motions had not been filed, there was no trial date, and defendants would not be prejudiced by the substitution. They also argued that refusing the request would significantly prejudice them by preventing live expert testimony about the neurological issues at issue.
Ruling
Judge Ronnie Abrams granted the application. The court found good cause to extend the discovery deadline to allow the plaintiffs to find a substitute neurological expert. The court extended the discovery deadline to March 4, 2022.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.