Basham

Basham v. Babcock

Good Law
1996 Cal. App. LEXIS 407·44 Cal. App. 4th 1717·52 Cal. Rptr. 2d 456·96 Daily Journal DAR 5143·96 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 3139
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 2, 1996B091949California2,335 words

Opinion

Opinion

Gilbert, J.

Here we hold that a party who has designated an expert to testify on a particular subject may not replace that expert with one stated on a supplemental list.

Plaintiffs appeal from a defense verdict in their personal injury trial. The trial court allowed an expert designated by defendant on a supplemental list to testify in place of the originally designated expert and on the same subject matter. Plaintiffs contend this is error under Code of Civil Procedure section 2034. We agree and reverse. [[/]]

Facts

Garlyn A. Basham filed a complaint against Judith Babcock for damages arising out of an automobile accident. Babcock’s automobile struck the driver’s side door of Basham’s automobile. At the time Basham’s car was parked in a shopping center lot and Basham was in the car. He claimed he felt a sharp jolt that caused back injuries. Babcock claimed she was only going one or two miles per hour when she hit Basham’s car. The defense theory was that back problems suffered by Basham were caused by a preexisting condition.

On November 28, 1994, the parties exchanged designation of experts. Basham designated his treating physicians Doctors Alex Gazaui and Robert Klein. He…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.