Substitute Expert, Motion to

Except as indicated, all indented material is copied directly from the court’s opinion. 

Decisions of the Tennessee Supreme Court

Decisions of the Tennessee Court of Appeals

Blackburn v. McLean, No. M2021-00417-COA-R3-CV, p. 11 (Tenn. Ct. App. Aug. 10, 2022). 

The trial court’s decision here, which concerned the Plaintiff’s efforts to secure a new expert after the deadline set in the scheduling order, is subject to review for an abuse of discretion. Discretion itself denotes the absence of a hard and fast rule. When invoked as a guide for judicial action, it requires that the trial court view the factual circumstances in light of the relevant legal principles and exercise considered discretion before reaching a conclusion. Discretion should not be arbitrarily exercised. The applicable facts and law must be given due consideration. Langnes v. Green, 282 U.S. 531, 541, 51 S.Ct. 243, 247, 75 L.Ed. 520, 526 (1931). An appellate court should not reverse for “abuse of discretion” a discretionary judgment of a trial court unless it affirmatively appears that the trial court’s decision was against logic or reasoning, and caused an injustice or injury to the party complaining. Douglas v. Estate of Robertson, 876 S.W.2d 95, 97 (Tenn.1994); Foster v. Amcon Intern., 621 S.W.2d 142, 145 (Tenn.1981).

Ballard v. Herzke, 924 S.W.2d 652, 661 (Tenn. 1996).


Grading Papers - Civil Copyright © 2023 by BirdDog Law, LLC (No copyright claimed as to government works).. All Rights Reserved.