27-706. Rule 706. Judge appointed experts; procedure; compensation; disclosure of appointment; parties may call experts of own selection.

326 words·~1 min read·/ne/chapter-27/27-706

A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.

(1)The judge may on his own motion or on the motion of any party enter an order to show why expert witnesses should not be appointed, and may request the parties to submit nominations. The judge may appoint any expert witnesses agreed upon by the parties, and may appoint witnesses of his own selection. An expert witness shall not be appointed by the judge unless he consents to act. A witness so appointed shall be informed of his duties by the judge in writing, a copy of which shall be filed with the clerk, or at a conference in which the parties shall have opportunity to participate. A witness so appointed shall advise the parties of his findings, if any; his deposition may be taken by any party; and he may be called to testify by the judge or any party. He shall be subject to cross-examination by each party, including a party calling him as a witness.

(2)Expert witnesses so appointed are entitled to reasonable compensation in whatever sum the judge may allow. The compensation thus fixed is payable from funds which may be provided by law in criminal cases and by the opposing parties in equal portions to the clerk of the court in civil cases at a time fixed by the court and thereafter charged in like manner as other costs.

(3)In the exercise of his discretion, the judge may authorize disclosure to the jury of the fact that the court appointed the expert witness.

(4)Nothing in this rule limits the parties in calling expert witnesses of their own selection.

If proposed expert testimony is fundamentally flawed by the expert's own admission, it is not an abuse of discretion for the trial court to refuse to appoint the expert under this section when there is no showing that this shortcoming in the expert's proposed testimony has been remedied. State v. Quezada, 20 Neb. App. 836, 834 N.W.2d 258 (2013).