Opinion ID: 2276854
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: Court-Appointed Expert

Text: This statutory appraisal proceeding must be retried without the use of a master. To determine the ultimate issue of value, the next question presented relates to the role of any court-designated expert witness that the successor judge may decide to appoint. In Shell Oil, this Court held that the Court of Chancery has the inherent authority to appoint neutral expert witnesses  to assist it in appraisal cases. [68] The successor judge concluded that if the Court of Chancery has the inherent authority to appoint experts, it may define the nature and scope of the duties to be performed by the expert. The successor judge authorized the special court-appointed expert witness to discharge the following quasi-judicial functions: to hold hearings or demand briefing at his . . . discretion; to require the submission of evidence and arguments; to petition the Court of Chancery to open the record; to decide in the first instance what evidence is material and contested pursuant to Court of Chancery Rule 63; to decide in the first instance whether the testimony and report of Technicolor's witness Klopfenstein is admissible pursuant to Delaware Rules of Evidence 702 and 703; to otherwise adopt or reject legal and factual arguments made by the parties; to decide which parts of the original trial judge's 1990 opinion are tainted by his legal error and to rely on findings found to be untainted; to issue an appraisal report; and to respond in the first instance to exceptions thereto proffered by the parties. According to the successor judge, his special court-appointed expert witness will function much like a special appraisal Master. Nevertheless, the successor judge will also require that the special court-appointed expert witness testify and be cross-examined by the parties' attorneys. The Court of Chancery's authority to appoint an independent expert does not include the power to establish a process whereby that court-appointed expert witness will assume for all practical purposes the functions of a court-appointed appraiser. [69] The 1976 amendments to the appraisal statute eliminated the role of masters irrespective of the nomenclature used for such assignments. [70] This Court has been explicit in characterizing the Court of Chancery's power to appoint experts as witnesses. [71] In this case, the successor judge's erroneous designation was compounded when he decided to assign the quasi-judicial role of a master and the neutral rule of a court-appointed expert witness to the same individual in the same proceeding. The prospect of having one person discharge inherently inconsistent multiple functions in a single judicial proceeding invokes visions of such mythological creatures as Janus [72] or Cerberus. [73] This Court has consistently held that a judge cannot preside and testify as a witness during the course of the same proceeding. [74] Similarly, we have held persons who perform a quasi-judicial function during one phase of a proceeding cannot be called to testify later as a witness. [75] In Shell Oil, where this Court originally recognized the Court of Chancery's power to appoint experts, we stated that it paralleled the authority conferred upon federal trial judges in Federal Evidence Rule 706. [76] Those federal provisions were not mandatory but recommended to the Court of Chancery as helpful guidelines where such an appointment is contemplated. [77] Our holding in Shell Oil was explicitly limited, however, to the appointment of persons to serve as expert witnesses. As we stated: A court appointed expert is subject to the same standards which govern other expert witnesses under the Delaware Rules of Evidence. The expert must advise the parties of all findings [ see Ct.Ch.R. 26(a)(4) ] and submit to depositions. Once trial commences, it is incumbent upon the trial judge to arrange for the court's expert witness to testify if neither party calls him as a witness. The court's expert must be subject to cross-examination by both parties, even if one party chose to call him as its witness. [78] On November 10, 1999, this Court amended the Delaware Uniform Rules of Evidence to add new Rule 706, relating to court-appointed experts: Rule 706. Court-appointed experts. (a) Appointment. The court may on its own motion or on the motion of any party enter an order to show cause why expert witnesses should not be appointed, and may request the parties to submit nominations. The court may appoint any expert witnesses agreed upon by the parties, and may appoint expert witnesses of its own selection. An expert witness shall not be appointed by the court unless the witness consents to act. A witness so appointed shall be informed of the witness' duties by the court 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 the witness' findings, if any; the witness' deposition may be taken by any party; and the witness may be called to testify by the court or any party. The witness shall be subject to cross-examination by each party, including a party calling the witness. [79] Rule 706 became effective immediately. Thus, Rule 706 will apply to the further proceedings in this case. [80] When this matter is remanded, the successor judge's authority to appoint an expert witness must be exercised in conformity with Delaware Rule of Evidence 706. To the extent that Rule 706 is relatively new, the precedents established by the federal courts will provide persuasive guidance.