Case Explained: GRENIER, ET AL. V. USA

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Filed: 2026-08-03 Docket: 1:22-cv-00396-LEK-KJM The ninth-circuit affirmed the district court’s judgment for the United States in a Federal Tort Claims Act action alleging medical malpractice during childbirth at Tripler Army Medical Center. The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in excluding Plaintiffs’ proposed rebuttal expert, Dr. Ofer Levy, because his testimony was duplicative of other experts and should have been disclosed by the initial deadline under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(D)(ii). The court further determined that the exclusion did not require application of the Rule 37(c)(1) framework from *R & R Sails, Inc. v. Insurance Co. of Pennsylvania* because it did not amount to dismissal of the claims. Although the district court erred by admitting undisclosed expert testimony from Tripler providers without satisfying Rule 26(a)(2)(C) and Rule 37(c)(1), this error was harmless under Fed. R. Civ. P. 61 and 28 U.S.C. § 2111, as the court would likely have reached the same result based on other retained expert testimony and evidence regarding the standard of care. The appellate court also found no clear error in the district court’s factual findings concerning fetal growth, delivery counseling, and causation of infection, nor did it find an abuse of discretion in limiting cross-examination or allowing the judge to comment on witness credibility during the bench trial. Consequently, the judgment for the government stands. Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.