(a) Appointment Process. On a party's motion or on its own, the court may order the parties to show cause why expert witnesses should not be appointed and may ask the parties to submit nominations. The court may appoint any expert that the parties agree on and any of its own choosing. But the court may only appoint someone who consents to act.
(b) Expert's Role. The court must inform the expert of the expert's duties. The court may do so in writing and have a copy filed with the clerk or may do so orally at a conference in which the parties have an opportunity to participate. The expert:
(1) must advise the parties of any findings the expert makes;
(2) may be deposed by any party;
(3) may be called to testify by the court or any party; and
(4) may be cross-examined by any party, including the party that called the expert.
(c) Compensation. The expert is entitled to a reasonable compensation, as set by the court. The compensation is payable as follows:
(1) in a criminal case, or in a civil case when the law allows it, from any funds that are provided by law; and
(2) in any other civil case, by the parties in the proportion and at the time that the court directs, and the compensation is then charged like other costs.
(d) Disclosing the Appointment to the Jury. The court may authorize disclosure to the jury that the court appointed the expert.
(e) Parties' Choice of Their Own Experts. This rule does not limit a party in calling its own experts.
Rule 706 was amended, effective March 1, 1990; March 1, 2014.
Rule 706 is based on Fed.R.Ev. 706.
Subdivision (a) was amended, effective March 1, 1990. The amendments are technical in nature and no substantive change is intended.
Rule 706 was amended, effective March 1, 2014, in response to the December 1, 2011, revision of the Federal Rules of Evidence. The language and organization of the rule were changed to make the rule more easily understood and to make style and terminology consistent throughout the rules. There is no intent to change any result in any ruling on evidence admissibility.
SOURCES: Joint Procedure Committee Minutes of April 26-27, 2012, page 32; March 24-25, 1988, page 12; December 3, 1987, pages 15-16; June 3, 1976, pages 7, 8; October 1, 1975, page 6. Fed.R.Ev. 706; Rule 706, SBAND proposal.
CONSIDERED: N.D.C.C. § 28-26-06(5).
Cross Reference: N.D.R.Civ.P. 16 (Pretrial Conferences; Scheduling; Management), N.D.R.Civ.P. 26 (General Provisions Governing Discovery), N.D.R.Civ.P. 35 (Physical and Mental Examination); N.D.R.Crim.P. 28 (Interpreters).