With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". R. Evid. 701(e). Defendant’s Rule 26(a)(2) Expert Testimony Disclosures were due 150 days before the January 26, 2015 calendar call, or August 28, 2014. See Trial Scheduling Order [ECF No. 11]. Plaintiffs assert that Defendant did not disclose Mr. Stephano or identify him as an expert witness before October 27, 2014, the day Defendant provided its initial Rule 26(a)(1)(A) disclosures. Defendant does not controvert Plaintiffs’ assertion. Mr. Stephano is an accountant, providing his opinion on Defendant’s net worth based on his knowledge of GAAP. As such, Mr. Stephano is an expert witness testifying in the form of an opinion based on specialized knowledge. See e.g., Winc, LLC v. RSM McGladrey Fin. Process Outsourcing, LLC, No. 08cvl559 BTM (WMc), 2010 WL 3894966, at *2 (S.D.Cal.2010) (<HOLDING>). Mr. Stephano is not, by contrast, an employee

A: holding that lay witness opinion as to guilt of defendant inadmissible
B: holding that a forensic accountant is an expert witness not a lay witness
C: holding that witness immunity does not bar a claim against a retained expert witness for negligence performance of his duty
D: recognizing that a surveyor was an expert witness
B.