ScholarLens Back to search
1983•Indiana Magazine of History (Indiana University)Open access

Discovery of Non-Testifying "In-House" Experts Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26

James R. Pielemeier

Open full text 0 citations

Abstract

26(b)(4).2 See FED.R. Civ.P. 26(b)(4) advisory committee note (1970).Professors Wright and Miller devote four sentences to the issue, stating that such experts should be treated as ordinary witnesses.C.

Open-access reader

About this research paper

What this paper is about

26(b)(4).2 See FED.R. Civ.P. 26(b)(4) advisory committee note (1970).Professors Wright and Miller devote four sentences to the issue, stating that such experts should be treated as ordinary witnesses.C.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

26(b)(4).2 See FED.R. Civ.P. 26(b)(4) advisory committee note (1970).Professors Wright and Miller devote four sentences to the issue, stating that such experts should be treated as ordinary witnesses.C.

Key concepts: Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Anticipation (artificial intelligence), Context (archaeology), Civil procedure, Set (abstract data type), Resolution (logic), Advisory committee, Political science

Related papers

Related paper 1Related paper 2Related paper 3
Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Discovery of Non-Testifying "In-House" Experts Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26 — Research Paper | ScholarLens