Laserfiche WebLink
evidence should be stricken by the adjudicatory body. See, e.g., Todd, 980 P.2d at 978. In <br />short, trial by "ambush" is not permitted. <br />In the absence of an automatic right, or leave as requested above, to submit additional <br />rebuttal opinions and materials into evidence and to amend its exhibit list, SCC is prejudiced <br />in its ability to defend against the newly disclosed opinions set forth in the Walter Report and <br />the GVC Report. The disclosure and submission of the Walter and GVC Reports by <br />Fontanari on April 12th, denied SCC any opportunity to review, conduct appropriate <br />responsive investigations, and provide a rebuttal to those opinions prior to the April 12th <br />deadline. In light of the foregoing, if the MLRB declines to grant SCC the requested leave to <br />supplement its exhibits to provide responsive rebuttal reports and opinions, then MLRB <br />should also strike the Walter Report and the GVC Report, and preclude any expert testimony <br />by the authors of those reports at the Formal Hearing. <br />III. CONCLUSION <br />Based on the foregoing, SCC respectfully requests that it be permitted to amend its <br />exhibit list to include any rebuttal reports, including appendices or figures, prepared by <br />Stover or Huddleston Berry that are responsive to the Walter or GVC Reports, by providing <br />such rebuttal reports and amended exhibit lists to the Parties and to the MLRB no later than <br />May 1, 2017. <br />In the alternative, if the MLRB declines to permit SCC to supplement its exhibits and <br />exhibit list as proposed above, then the MLRB should strike Fontanari Exhibits 24 and 25 <br />and preclude any expert testimony by the authors of the Walter and GVC Reports. <br />5 <br />