DAVIS’ MOTION TO STRIKE SUPPLEMENTAL DECLARATION OF EXPERT 

WITNESS 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

TEXARKANA DIVISION 

JERRAL W. JONES, 

Plaintiff, 

vs. 

ALEXANDRA DAVIS and CYNTHIA 

DAVIS f/k/a CYNTHIA DAVIS-SPENCER,

Defendants, 

CIVIL ACTION No. 5:23-cv-00032-RWS

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

DAVIS’ MOTION TO STRIKE SUPPLEMENTAL DECLARATION OF EXPERT 

WITNESS 

Cynthia Davis f/k/a Cynthia Davis Spencer (“Cynthia”) respectfully files this Motion to 

Strike the Supplemental Testimony of Lance Watson and respectfully shows as follows: 

I. INTRODUCTION 

The parties were required to disclose expert witnesses no later than March 12, 2024. (Dkt. 

No. 38). Discovery ended on April 23, 2024. (Id.). Jones filed a motion for sanctions, attaching 

Lance Watson’s Declaration as an exhibit in support on June 3, 2024. (Dkt. No. 120). On June 7, 

2024, almost three months after the original deadline to disclose expert witnesses, Jones late 

designated his expert witness, after representing to the Court that he had obtained an expert in 

April or May 2024. 

The court requested briefing from the parties on Plaintiff’s Motion for Sanctions for the 

Destruction of Evidence against Alexandra Davis and Cynthia Davis (Dkt., 120). The briefing was 

due on June 28, 2024. The deposition of the Plaintiff’s expert was taken on June 20, 2024. The 

Case 5:23-cv-00032-RWS Document 192 Filed 07/01/24 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 3818
DAVIS’ MOTION TO STRIKE SUPPLEMENTAL DECLARATION OF EXPERT 

WITNESS 

deposition of Defendants’ expert was taken on June 25, 2024. The responses due under the court’s 

order were timely filed. 

Immediately after the filing of the responses by Defendant, Plaintiff served a Supplemental 

Declaration of Lance Watson that contradicts his prior testimony (Ex.1). Plaintiff once again did 

not seek leave to amend nor did he concern himself with the rules or deadlines of this Court. 

Plaintiff’s expert modified his testimony AFTER his deposition and only one business day before 

the hearing on this matter. 

II. ARGUMENT 

Federal Rule of Procedure 26a provides that the expert disclosure must be made either by 

the date set by the court or stipulated by the parties, or at least 90 days before the date set for 

trial. FRCP 26(a)(2). The plaintiff designated their expert twenty-five days prior to the hearing in 

this matter and has now amended his testimony one business day prior to the hearing. The late 

filing once again harms Defendants. 

Plaintiff’s expert waited until briefing had been completed by Defendants in this matter 

and then proceeded to change his prior testimony with no ability to cross-examine him on his 

new testimony. The amendment deprives Defendant of the right to confront the witness on his 

new opinions. 

Plaintiff has once again engaged in conduct designated to injure Defendant with no fear 

of consequences. Jones disregards discovery deadlines, designation deadlines and deadlines set 

by order of this Court. Jones cannot be rewarded for this ongoing pattern of conduct and thus, the 

Supplemental Declaration of Plaintiff’s expert should be struck. 

Defendant reincorporates the allegations in Defendant, Cynthia Davis’s Motion to Strike 

Expert Witness (Dkt, 141), Defendant, Cynthia Davis’s Motion to Exclude Evidence (Dkt. 174) 

Case 5:23-cv-00032-RWS Document 192 Filed 07/01/24 Page 2 of 6 PageID #: 3819
DAVIS’ MOTION TO STRIKE SUPPLEMENTAL DECLARATION OF EXPERT 

WITNESS 

and Defendant, Alex Davis’s Motion to Exclude Testimony of Lance Watson (Dkt. 182) as 

further evidence of the gamesmanship that Defendants have been subject to. 

III. ATTORNEY FEES 

Plaintiff has shown a pattern of conduct intended to harm Defendants and unnecessarily 

increase the costs of litigation. Plaintiff continues to violate the deadlines set by this Court in its 

Docket Control Order (Dkt, 38). Plaintiff now amends the testimony of its expert witness one 

business day prior to the hearing in this matter, forcing Cynthia to file this motion in her defense. 

Plaintiff should be ordered to pay the attorney fees for the drafting of this motion in defense of 

his untimely filling and continued pattern of conduct. 

IV. CONCLUSION 

A modification of the testimony and opinions of Plaintiff’s expert filed one business day 

prior what amounts to a dispositive hearing on this matter is undoubtedly untimely and should be 

struck. 

The declaration was once again untimely, and Defendant has been prejudiced and will 

continue to be if Plaintiff’s expert is allowed to testify (and modify his testimony) in this matter. 

The Supplemental Declaration of Lance Watson should be STRUCK in its entirety. 

 

Case 5:23-cv-00032-RWS Document 192 Filed 07/01/24 Page 3 of 6 PageID #: 3820
DAVIS’ MOTION TO STRIKE SUPPLEMENTAL DECLARATION OF EXPERT 

WITNESS 

Respectfully Submitted, 

 

 BALEKIAN HAYES, PLLC 

 

_/s/ Kris Hayes .

 KRIS HAYES 

 State Bar No. 24031719 

kris@bh-pllc.com

 4144 N. Central Expressway, Suite 1200 

 Dallas, Texas 75204 

 (214) 828-2800 Telephone 

 (214) 827-9671 Facsimile 

 ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT 

CYNTHIA DAVIS f/k/a CYNTHIA DAVIS 

SPENCER 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

On July 1, 2024, I electronically submitted the foregoing document with the clerk of the 

court of the U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Texas, using the electronic case filing system 

of the court. I hereby certify that I will serve all counsel and/or pro se parties of record 

electronically or by another manner authorized by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5(b)(2). 

___/s/ Kris Hayes .

KRIS HAYES 

 

Case 5:23-cv-00032-RWS Document 192 Filed 07/01/24 Page 4 of 6 PageID #: 3821
DAVIS’ MOTION TO STRIKE SUPPLEMENTAL DECLARATION OF EXPERT 

WITNESS 

CERTIFICATE OF CONFERENCE 

 The undersigned counsel hereby certifies that the meet and confer requirement in Local 

Rule CV-7(h) has been met. The conference required by Local Rule CV-7(h) was conducted via 

email on June 29, 2024. Davis (Spencer) counsel sent a communication to Plaintiff’s counsel 

informing them of the intent to file this motion and asking whether they were opposed. The 

email was sent to Jay Gray, Andrew Bergman, Matt Keil, Erin Keil, Kris Hayes, Chip Babcock, 

Edwin Buffmire, David Folsom, David Moran, Cody Martinez, and the undersigned counsel. 

Despite best efforts, Davis (Spencer) has not received a response regarding the motion, leaving 

the issue open for the court to resolve. Defendant Alexandra Davis is unopposed to the motion. 

___/s/ Kris Hayes .

KRIS HAYES 

 

Case 5:23-cv-00032-RWS Document 192 Filed 07/01/24 Page 5 of 6 PageID #: 3822
DAVIS’ MOTION TO STRIKE SUPPLEMENTAL DECLARATION OF EXPERT 

WITNESS 

Case 5:23-cv-00032-RWS Document 192 Filed 07/01/24 Page 6 of 6 PageID #: 3823