First Circuit Holds that Failure to Supplement Responses to Interrogatories Does Not Warrant New Trial

Per Colon-Millin v. Sears Roebuck De Puerto Rico, Inc., ---F.3d ---, 2006 WL 2008016 (1st Cir. July 19, 2006):

...Our review of the record reveals that the defendants did not comply with their obligation under Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(e)(2) to supplement their responses to the plaintiff's written interrogatories. This failure led to trial testimony that understandably surprised the plaintiff. Nevertheless, the plaintiff failed to respond to the surprise at trial in a manner that justifies a new trial. She did not object to the defense witnesses' testimony, and she did not request a continuance in order to respond or seek any other sanction for a discovery violation. Furthermore, the district court did not err in its jury instructions, and the plaintiff had the opportunity to state the grounds of her objections to the jury instructions on the record. We therefore conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the plaintiff's motion for a new trial.