George v. Ericson George v. Ericson

George v. Ericson

250 CONN. 312, 736 A.2D 889, 1999.CT.42408

    • 0,99 €
    • 0,99 €

Publisher Description

The principal issue in this appeal is whether the evidentiary rule barring the admission of the testimony of a nontreating physician, as previously articulated by this court in Brown v. Blauvelt, 152 Conn. 272, 274, 205 A.2d 773 (1964), should be overruled. The plaintiff, Helene E. George, appeals from the judgment of the trial court, rendered upon a jury verdict. The verdict awarded the plaintiff compensatory economic damages only. Prior to the trial, the court had granted the motion of the defendant, Donald W. Ericson, to preclude the plaintiff from calling a nontreating physician as a witness. We conclude that Brown should be overruled, and that the trial courts exclusion of the nontreating physicians testimony was harmful. We therefore reverse the judgment of the trial court and remand the case for a new trial.

GENRE
Professional & Technical
RELEASED
1999
24 August
LANGUAGE
EN
English
LENGTH
29
Pages
PUBLISHER
LawApp Publishers
SIZE
65.5
KB

More Books by Connecticut Supreme Court

Baptiste v. Better Val-U Supermarket Baptiste v. Better Val-U Supermarket
2002
State v. Tucker State v. Tucker
1999
Associated Builders and Contractors v. City of Hartford Associated Builders and Contractors v. City of Hartford
1999
State v. Aponte State v. Aponte
1999
Amodio v. Amodio Amodio v. Amodio
1999
Pitchell v. City of Hartford Pitchell v. City of Hartford
1999