the new rule nor does the rule provide a penalty for a violation
such as that sought by the claimant on this motion.
The admitted release of statistical information pertaining to
the claimant's comparable sales does not, as argued by the
claimant, compel the Court to strike the State's subsequently
2. Prior editions of rule 25a were silent as to expert reports and their
amendment or supplementation.
308 188 MISCELLANEOUS REPORTS, 2d SERIES
led amended appraisal and geological reports as prejudicial or
grossly unfair. The information imparted to George F. Silver
by Associate Attorney Shehigian, which consisted solely of raw
sales data, was allegedly available from sources other than the
claimant's appraisal. In fact, Mr. Silver states in his adavit
submitted in opposition to the motion that he was aware of the
three comparable sales independently of the information
provided by Mr. Shehigian and conrmed the statement
contained in Shehigian's adavit that he received only raw
sales data concerning the comparable sales with all opinions,
comments and conclusions contained in the claimant's ap-
praisal and relating thereto deleted. The claimant does not
suggest that information other than that described by both
Shehigian and Silver was released. Under the circumstances
presented, including the assertion by Mr. Silver that two of the
comparable sales utilized in the amended appraisal had not oc-
curred at the time the original appraisal was prepared and
that information concerning the third such sale was unavail-
able at the time he concluded the investigation attendant to
preparation of the original appraisal, the Court is not per-
suaded that any undue advantage was obtained.
Finally, it does not appear that the defendant's inclusion in