Mississippi Expert Witness Discovery Rules

Mississippi's expert discovery aligns with federal rules, detailing requirements for disclosures, reports, and protections for communications and materials.

ByZach Barreto

Updated on

Mississippi capitol

In this article

What Is the Scope of Expert Discovery in Mississippi?

In Mississippi, the discovery of expert information aligns closely with the federal framework, particularly Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(b)(4). Under Mississippi Rule of Civil Procedure 26(b)(4), parties are required to disclose the identity of any expert witness to be used at trial. For retained experts, a written report detailing all opinions, the basis and reasons for those opinions, and the data or information considered is mandatory. This report must also include the expert’s exhibits, qualifications, publications, prior cases testified in over the past four years, and compensation details. The scope extends primarily to testifying experts, while consulting experts remain largely protected unless exceptional circumstances dictate otherwise.

Mississippi imposes limits on the discovery of expert communications and draft reports, aligning with the amendments adopted in 2010. Specifically, Mississippi Rule of Civil Procedure 26(b)(4)(B) and (C) protects draft reports and certain attorney-expert communications, ensuring that such materials remain confidential unless an exception applies.

Timing and Procedure for Expert Discovery in Mississippi

Expert discovery in Mississippi is strategically timed within the litigation process. According to Mississippi’s Uniform Circuit and Chancery Court Rule 4.04, expert designations follow a structured timeline: the plaintiff typically designates experts within 60 days after discovery opens, and the defendant follows 90 days thereafter. This phased approach ensures orderly disclosure and preparation.

The procedural steps for expert discovery are precise. After expert reports or disclosures are submitted, the opposing party may depose the expert, mirroring federal practices. Mississippi Rule of Civil Procedure 26(b)(4)(C) stipulates that the party conducting the deposition must compensate the expert with a reasonable fee for their time. Additionally, any supplements to the expert disclosures must comply with Mississippi Rule of Civil Procedure 26(f), which mandates timely updates to avoid sanctions.

What Methods of Expert Discovery Are Permitted in Mississippi?

Mississippi permits several methods for expert discovery, including:

  • Depositions: Allowed after expert reports are disclosed, following federal analogs but requiring the deposing party to bear the expert's fees.
  • Written Interrogatories and Document Requests: These are permissible to obtain further details on the expert’s opinions and the basis for those opinions.

Discovery typically extends to testifying experts. Non-testifying consulting experts are generally shielded from discovery, barring exceptional circumstances where their information is crucial and cannot be obtained otherwise.

Limits on Discovery of Expert Materials and Communications

Mississippi’s approach to expert materials and communications reflects federal standards, particularly regarding protection. Draft reports and attorney–expert communications about the expert's opinions and mental impressions are protected under Mississippi Rule of Civil Procedure 26(b)(4)(B) and (C). Exceptions exist primarily to address potential biases, reliance materials, or specific facts and data considered by the expert.

The protection extends to the compensation structure, limiting discovery to prevent undue influence or harassment. Noteworthy cases in Mississippi have reinforced these protections, ensuring that expert discovery remains focused and efficient.

Consequences for Noncompliance or Discovery Violations

Noncompliance with expert discovery rules in Mississippi can lead to significant consequences under Mississippi Rule of Civil Procedure 37. Sanctions may include:

  • Exclusion of Expert Testimony: Failure to disclose or timely supplement expert information can result in exclusion during trial.
  • Monetary Sanctions: Courts may impose financial penalties on parties violating discovery obligations.
  • Continuances: Delays in trial schedules may occur to accommodate necessary compliance with discovery rules.

The rule underscores the importance of adhering to procedural requirements to maintain the integrity of the discovery process.

Relevant Rules and Legal Authority in Mississippi

The governing authorities for expert discovery in Mississippi include:

These rules, coupled with pertinent case law, shape the expert discovery landscape, offering a structured yet flexible framework for managing expert testimony in Mississippi’s courts. Notably, the state’s alignment with federal practices ensures consistency while accommodating specific procedural nuances unique to Mississippi.

About the author

Zach Barreto

Zach Barreto

Zach Barreto is a distinguished professional in the legal industry, currently serving as the Senior Vice President of Research at the Expert Institute. With a deep understanding of a broad range of legal practice areas, Zach's expertise encompasses personal injury, medical malpractice, mass torts, and defective products. His skills are particularly evident in handling complex litigation matters, including high-profile cases such as opioids litigation, NFL concussion litigation, California wildfires, 3M earplugs, Elmiron, transvaginal mesh, Roundup, Camp Lejeune, hernia mesh, IVC filters, Paraquat, Paragard, talcum powder, and Zantac.

Under his leadership, the Expert Institute’s research team has expanded impressively from a single member to a robust team of 100 professionals over the last decade. This growth reflects his ability to navigate the intricate and demanding landscape of legal research and expert recruitment effectively. Zach has been instrumental in working on nationally significant litigation matters, including cases involving pharmaceuticals, medical devices, toxic chemical exposure, and wrongful death, among others.

At the Expert Institute, Zach is responsible for managing all aspects of the research department and developing strategic institutional relationships. He plays a key role in equipping attorneys for success through expert consulting, case management, strategic research, and expert due diligence provided by the Institute’s cloud-based legal services platform, Expert iQ. Zach holds a Bachelor's Degree in Political Science and European History from Vanderbilt University.

background image

Subscribe to our newsletter

Join our newsletter to stay up to date on legal news, insights and product updates from Expert Institute.