Document Type
Case Summary
Publication Date
8-21-2022
Case Synopsis
The Supreme Court of Nevada addressed the standard for substituting an expert witness after the close of discovery and considered whether the district court abused its discretion in modifying the scheduling order, reopening discovery, and granting the motion to substitute. Torremoro requested a writ of mandamus requesting this Court to instruct the district court to reverse its order allowing substitution of an expert witness. The Court found that NRCP 16(b)(4)’s “good cause” test, in combination with any relevant local rules, provides the standard governing when a district court may modify a scheduling order. 2 The Court also concluded that the district court properly granted the motion to substitute the expert witness. The Court denied the petition for a writ of mandamus.
Recommended Citation
Sullivan, Mackenzie, "Torremoro v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 138 Nev. Adv. Op. 54 (July 07, 2022)" (2022). Nevada Supreme Court Summaries. 1525.
https://scholars.law.unlv.edu/nvscs/1525