4 ms·

I didn't realize expert testimony could be non-public. That seems to undermine the entire idea of a public trials, IMHO. Is there some justification for it th

• jonathankoren 10y ago
  I imagine It had something to do with the fact they we're discussing trade secrets. If the secrets weren't under seal, then they wouldn't be secret, and irreparable harm would be done.
• rayiner 10y ago
  According to the article, it was the expert report that wasn't public, not the expert testimony. An expert report is not evidence, it is not reviewed by the jury. What is presented to the jury is the expert's testimony, which is subject to cross-examination by the other party. That testimony is almost always public. The expert report is prepared before trial, and explains to the other side what the expert's opinion will be and the basis for that opinion. It is used to help prepare cross-examination when the expert ultimately testifies at trial.
• candiodari 10y ago
  Yes. This is a private trial, not a criminal one. Only criminal trials are public. Private law trials are only necessarily public for the complainant and defendant. Essentially what's happening here is that there are 2 parties that signed a contact, and then one of the parties violated said contract. The only people involved are those 2 parties (and anyone they hire/ask/... to represent them). Nobody else has a right to know.