Albert D. Seeno Construction Company v. Aspen Insurance UK Limited

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaOctober 16, 20203:17-cv-03765California3,367 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 ALBERT D. SEENO CONSTRUCTION Case No. 17-cv-03765-SI COMPANY, et al., 8 Plaintiffs, ORDER GRANTING MOTIONS TO STRIKE v. Re: Dkt. Nos. 172, 175

ASPEN INSURANCE UK LIMITED,

11 Defendant. 12 On October 9, 2020, the Court held a hearing on the parties’ cross motions to strike expert witnesses. For the reasons set forth below, the Court GRANTS defendant’s motion to strike plaintiff’s expert witness, and GRANTS plaintiff’s motion to strike defendant’s expert witness. 16 BACKGROUND On August 28, 2020, defendant Aspen Insurance UK Limited (“Aspen”) filed a motion to strike plaintiff Albert D. Seeno Construction Co., Inc.’s (“ADSCO”) expert Charles Miller. Dkt. No. 172 (Aspen’s Motion to Strike). Aspen seeks exclusion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37(c)(1) because ADSCO failed to properly disclose Mr. Miller’s expert testimony until almost three months after the expert disclosure…

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.