Emma Spring v. Timothy R. Bradford

Summary

The court held that invoking Arizona Rule of Evidence 615 prohibits a party from providing prospective witnesses with transcripts of earlier trial testimony, including when the witnesses are experts. A violation in a civil case does not automatically establish prejudice, but the trial court must impose an appropriate corrective remedy; here, the jury instructions, cross-examination, and opportunity to show altered testimony were sufficient, so denial of a new trial was proper. The court also held that experts are not automatically exempt from sequestration and that a party must make a showing of essentiality and obtain an exemption before exposing the expert to prior trial testimony.