George v. Ericson George v. Ericson

George v. Ericson

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

    • USD 0.99
    • USD 0.99

Descripción editorial

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.

GÉNERO
Técnicos y profesionales
PUBLICADO
1999
24 de agosto
IDIOMA
EN
Inglés
EXTENSIÓN
29
Páginas
EDITORIAL
LawApp Publishers
VENDEDOR
Innodata Book Distribution Services Inc
TAMAÑO
65.5
KB

Más libros de 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