Choose a Topic

View Our Case Results
Kelley/Uustal Practice Areas

Jordan Grabel, M.D., et al. v. Adolfo Roura, Case Nos. 4D15-194 & 4D15-199 (4thDCA)

In Roura, the Fourth District reviewed by certiorari certain discovery orders permitting financial discovery relating to one of the defendant’s medical expert witnesses. The trial court had found that the deposition responses of the defense medical expert were inconsistent with the interrogatory responses provided by defense counsel. The inconsistences concerned the percentage of income the doctor derives from working as an expert witness and the number of times he has testified for plaintiffs and defendants in personal injury litigation. The trial court found these inconsistencies to constitute “the most unusual or compelling circumstances” that allowed production of the expert’s “financial and business records.” The Fourth District disagreed, finding the disputed discovery to exceed that permitted by Rule 1.280(b)(5)(A)(iii)4, “which limits discovery to an approximation of the expert’s involvement as an expert witness.” The Fourth District found that the expert and defense counsel provided all information required on the issue of bias, and that the requested financial discovery exceeded that allowed by the rule.


Recognized as One of the Nation's Best Law Firms

Don't just take our word for it. See it for yourself.

Client Reviews & Testimonials
  • AV Peer Review Rated
  • Florida Super Lawyers
  • South Florida Top Rated Lawyers
  • Best Law Firms
  • The Best Lawyers in America
  • The National Trial Lawyers - Top 100 Trial Lawyers
  • South Florida Business Journal - 2017  Best Places to Work
  • Sun Sentinel - 2017 Top Work Places
© 2014 All Rights Reserved The information on this website is for general information purposes only. Nothing on this site should be taken as legal advice for any individual case or situation. This information is not intended to create, and receipt or viewing does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship.