Wyoming Expert Witness Report Rules
Wyoming mandates expert witness reports that align with federal standards, ensuring comprehensive disclosure to uphold trial integrity and fairness.
Updated on
In this article
Are Expert Witness Reports Required in Wyoming?
In Wyoming), expert witness reports are indeed required under state law, specifically mirroring the federal expert disclosure requirements. According to Wyo. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2), parties must disclose the identity of any expert witness they intend to use at trial. If the expert is retained or specially employed for the purpose of providing testimony, a written report prepared and signed by the expert must be provided. The timing for disclosing these reports is typically set by a court's scheduling order, with the default being 90 days before trial for initial expert reports. This requirement ensures that all parties have adequate time to prepare for trial by reviewing the expert's opinions and the basis for those opinions.
What is Required in a Wyoming Expert Witness Report?
The content of a Wyoming expert witness report must align with the federal standards as outlined in Rule 26. Such a report must include:
- The expert’s opinions and the basis and reasons for those opinions.
- Data or other information considered by the expert.
- Any exhibits that will be used to summarize or support the opinions.
- The expert’s qualifications, including a list of publications authored in the past ten years.
- A list of cases in which the expert has testified as an expert at trial or by deposition in the past four years.
- A statement of the compensation to be paid for the study and testimony.
Wyoming does not deviate from the federal standard in terms of the required contents of the report, ensuring consistency and thoroughness in expert disclosures.
Scope and Authorship of the Report
In Wyoming, the report must be drafted and signed by the expert witness themselves, not the legal counsel. The extent of attorney involvement is limited to facilitating the expert’s understanding of the procedural requirements, but the substantive content must be the expert's own work product. The scope of the report can vary depending on the type of expert testimony or the nature of the case, with more detailed reports necessary for complex litigation.
Missing, Deficient, and Untimely Reports
The consequences of failing to provide a timely and complete expert report in Wyoming are significant. Under Wyo. R. Civ. P. 37(c), the court is authorized to exclude the expert's testimony at trial if a party fails to meet the disclosure requirements. This rule serves as a strong incentive for compliance and underscores the importance of adhering to procedural deadlines. In some cases, the court may impose sanctions or grant continuances, but the primary remedy for deficiencies remains the exclusion of testimony.
Original, Supplemental, and Rebuttal Reports
Wyoming’s procedural rules do not explicitly distinguish between original, supplemental, and rebuttal reports as separate categories. However, parties may supplement their disclosures when necessary to correct inaccuracies or to include new information acquired after the initial report. The timing and appropriateness of supplemental disclosures typically depend on the court’s scheduling order, and disputes over these filings are resolved on a case-by-case basis by the court.
Relevant State Rules and Legal Requirements
Wyoming’s expert disclosure requirements are governed by Wyo. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2) and 26(b)(4), which closely follow the federal rules. These rules emphasize the need for full and timely disclosure of expert information to facilitate fair and efficient litigation. Key cases interpreting these rules highlight the courts’ expectation that parties will adhere strictly to the procedural requirements, ensuring that expert testimony is both reliable and relevant.
In summary, Wyoming’s rules for expert witness reports require thorough preparation and disclosure akin to federal court practices, with stringent consequences for non-compliance aimed at maintaining the integrity of the judicial process.


