Indiana Expert Witness Rules: What Litigators Need to Know

Indiana’s expert witness framework is shaped by state-specific procedural rules and a moderate approach to admissibility grounded in Indiana Rule of Evidence 702. While expert disclosures do not follow federal-style mandates, trial courts retain discretion to impose specific deadlines and requirements through pretrial orders. In fields like medical malpractice and product liability, the expert’s role is pivotal, and compliance with Indiana’s procedural and evidentiary requirements is essential to success at trial.

Designation Requirements

Indiana does not require a formal motion to designate expert witnesses. Instead, expert identification occurs through the discovery process, particularly via interrogatory responses and pretrial disclosures as directed by the trial court. While Indiana Trial Rule 26(B)(4) governs expert discovery, the court’s case management order (CMO) typically sets the timeline and scope for expert identification.

Standard disclosure includes:

• Name and qualifications of the expert
• Subject matter of the anticipated testimony
• Summary of opinions and the factual basis
• Documents or data reviewed

Failure to identify an expert by the deadline set in the CMO may result in preclusion under Trial Rule 37, especially if the omission prejudices the opposing party or violates discovery orders.

Expert Disclosure Process

Indiana’s Trial Rule 26(B)(4) authorizes expert discovery but does not require written reports unless ordered by the court or agreed upon by the parties. Instead, expert opinion is typically disclosed through:

• Interrogatories
• Expert depositions
• Supplemental responses during discovery

When discovery is sought from a testifying expert, the party must disclose:

• The expert’s identity and field of expertise
• The general nature of the subject matter
• The opinions expected and basis for those opinions
• Any data, facts, or assumptions relied upon

In medical malpractice claims, disclosure is more formalized. Indiana mandates review by a Medical Review Panel prior to litigation under Indiana Code § 34-18-8-4, and the opinions of testifying experts must align with the issues assessed by that panel. If the panel finds no breach of the standard of care, expert testimony becomes essential to rebut the presumption in favor of the healthcare provider.

Required Declarations

Indiana does not mandate expert declarations or affidavits during initial disclosure. However, they are often required in motion practice, particularly when responding to summary judgment motions under Trial Rule 56(E).

Such affidavits must:

• Be made on personal knowledge
• Present admissible facts
• Demonstrate the affiant’s qualifications and competence to testify

In medical malpractice actions, an expert’s affidavit is essential to survive summary judgment if the Medical Review Panel opinion is unfavorable to the plaintiff. Courts will dismiss the claim if no admissible expert evidence creates a genuine issue of material fact regarding breach or causation.

Fees and Compensation

Indiana has no statutory fee caps for expert witnesses. Compensation is a matter of contract between the expert and the retaining party. However, Trial Rule 26(B)(4)(c) provides that:

• A party seeking to depose an opposing expert must pay a reasonable fee for the time spent preparing and testifying

The trial court may resolve disputes over fee reasonableness. Courts generally consider the expert’s qualifications, complexity of the subject, customary fees in the field, and time spent reviewing case materials.

Discovery Scope and Limitations

Under Trial Rule 26(B)(4), discovery of expert witnesses is permitted and includes:

• Identity, subject matter, and opinions of testifying experts
• Basis for opinions and reliance materials
• Expert depositions

Discovery of non-testifying experts—those retained for consultation and not expected to testify—is limited and requires a showing of exceptional circumstances. Additionally, while Indiana recognizes a version of the work-product doctrine under Trial Rule 26(B)(3), there is no express protection for draft expert reports or attorney-expert communications, unlike Federal Rule 26(b)(4)(B) and (C). As a result, these materials may be discoverable in certain contexts.

Attorneys should exercise caution when sharing strategy documents or draft analyses with experts, particularly in complex or contentious litigation.

Admissibility Standards

Indiana applies a Daubert-like reliability standard under Indiana Rule of Evidence 702, as clarified by Trimble v. State, 816 N.E.2d 83 (Ind. Ct. App. 2004) and Miller v. State, 575 N.E.2d 272 (Ind. 1991). Rule 702 requires:

1. The expert must be qualified by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education
2. The testimony must be based on reliable principles and methods
3. The principles and methods must be reliably applied to the facts of the case

Indiana courts emphasize methodological reliability over general acceptance. The trial judge serves as a gatekeeper and may conduct pretrial hearings to determine whether the expert’s opinions are based on sound reasoning and valid methodology.

This standard applies broadly to all expert testimony, including scientific, technical, and specialized knowledge, and is increasingly invoked in high-stakes tort and commercial litigation.

Key Deadlines & Strategy Notes

Indiana does not impose statewide expert disclosure deadlines. Instead, trial courts issue case-specific scheduling orders, often in the initial Case Management Plan (CMP). Typical deadlines include:

• Expert disclosure: 90–120 days before trial
• Rebuttal expert disclosure: 30–60 days later
• Daubert/Rule 702 motions: Deadlines set by CMP or pretrial order
• Summary judgment deadlines: Controlled by Trial Rule 56, often with expert affidavits attached

In medical malpractice claims, the Medical Review Panel process must be completed before proceeding to court. Once litigation begins, the plaintiff must be ready to rebut unfavorable panel opinions with admissible expert evidence, or risk early dismissal.

Strategically, practitioners should retain experts early and ensure that opinions are not only well-founded, but also articulated in a manner that withstands Rule 702 scrutiny. Experts should be prepared to defend their methodology at deposition and, if challenged, at a pretrial admissibility hearing.

State-Specific Statutes & Local Rules

• Indiana Rule of Trial Procedure 26(B)(4): Governs expert discovery
• Indiana Rule of Trial Procedure 56(E): Governs expert affidavits at summary judgment
• Indiana Rule of Evidence 702: Controls admissibility of expert testimony
• Indiana Code § 34-18-8-4: Medical Review Panel procedure in malpractice claims
• Indiana Code § 34-18-8-6: Effect of panel opinion on litigation

Some trial courts, particularly in Marion, Allen, and Lake counties, issue local case management orders with tailored deadlines and disclosure requirements. Attorneys must consult these documents to ensure full procedural compliance.