Opinion
20-CV-5643 (JMF)
06-30-2021
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
JESSE M. FURMAN, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
As discussed during the telephone conference held earlier this afternoon, Defendant's motion in limine to preclude the testimony of Franciso Veras, see ECF No. 33, is DENIED. In considering whether to preclude a witness from testifying based on a failure to comply with a discovery deadline, courts consider (1) the party's explanation for its failure to disclose, (2) the importance of the evidence, (3) the prejudice suffered by the opposing party, and (4) the possibility of a continuance. See Patterson v. Balsamico, 440 F.3d 104, 117 (2d Cir.2006). Here, the first factor cuts in favor of Defendants because, although Mr. Veras's employer may not have been known to counsel earlier, it was known to Plaintiff himself. But, in view of the fact that Mr. Veras was already deposed and the fact that he was an eyewitness to the accident at issue, the other factors weigh strongly in favor of permitting Mr. Veras to testify. Accordingly, the motion is DENIED. As discussed, Plaintiff shall respond to the other portions of Defendants' motion in limine, see ECF No. 33, at 5-9, by Monday, July 12, 2021.
SO ORDERED.