I award these for ploys and gambits of the kind described in my blogpost “Titanium? Tungsten? Chromium?” 6/19/20*. The latest recipient is the one among the twelve (count ’em, twelve) trusty attorneys for North Donald LA Property, LLC, North Donald LA Investors, LLC, Tax Matters Partner, Docket No. 24703-21, filed 9/19/24.

I bet I know which of the aforesaid twelve came up with this one.

Judge Albert G. (“Scholar Al”) Lauber judge-‘splains.

“Over the weekend following the fifth day of trial…, petitioner filed … Motions for Leave to File the First Amended Report of Messrs. Brooks and Williams and concurrently lodged their amended report.” Order, at p. 1.

“According to the Motions, the proposed amended report revises the market price for minerals using information that the authors recently obtained, revises other types of factual information, and adds supporting documentation and references.” Order, at p. 1.

Expert reports were lodged at the 60-day deadline.

“The proposed amended report is the result of substantial revisions to the [deadline] report. It contains numerous new or heavily modified paragraphs that analyze market conditions and discuss the pricing of clay. Sections 1 through 14 of the report, which set forth the text of the authors’ opinions, have been expanded from 27 pages in the original version to 30 pages in the amended version. The amended version estimates the value of the clay reserve on the property to be $93.21 million, a $30 million increase over the previous estimate of $63.27 million.” Order, at pp. 1-2.

How do you spell “ambush”?

Judge Scholar Al knows how.

“The reason for requiring that reports be lodged in advance is to enable the opposing party and his experts to evaluate the reports, consider the possible need for rebuttal reports, and prepare cross-examination. The proposed amended report contains a substantial amount of new information that was not made available to respondent in a timely fashion. It would thus prejudice respondent if the amended report petitioner now offers were received into evidence at this late date.” Order, at p.2.

Not a “Good Try.” Definitely “Metallica.”

*https://taishofflaw.com/2020/06/19/titanium-tungsten-chromium/