In order to oppose a motion for continuance due to a missing witness, what must the plaintiff disclose?

In the context of opposing a motion for continuance due to a missing witness, the plaintiff is required to disclose the expected testimony of the absent witness. This is crucial because the court needs to understand the relevance and importance of the witness's testimony to determine if the absence of the witness significantly impacts the case and whether a continuance is warranted.

By providing details about the anticipated testimony, the plaintiff effectively underscores the critical nature of that testimony and argues against the need for the delay. If the court recognizes that the absent witness's testimony is essential to the case and the plaintiff can demonstrate that they have made reasonable efforts to procure the witness's presence, it may influence the court's decision on the motion for continuance.

Focusing on the other options, while reasons for the witness's absence or prior statements may offer additional context, they do not directly address the core issue of how the missing testimony affects the case's progression. Similarly, presenting an alternative witness's testimony might not counter the necessity of the absent witness and could be viewed as insufficient to oppose the motion effectively. Thus, revealing the expected testimony of the absent witness remains the most pertinent and persuasive information for the court in opposing the motion for continuance.