California Trial Lawyers Journal, Volume 19California Trial Lawyers Association., 1981 - Law |
From inside the book
Results 1-3 of 15
Page 86
... discussed infra . For example , if you refer to the pathology report in the breast cancer ex- ample , you should mention in your summary " see tab 3 ” — or whatever other number you have assigned to the pathology report . In this way ...
... discussed infra . For example , if you refer to the pathology report in the breast cancer ex- ample , you should mention in your summary " see tab 3 ” — or whatever other number you have assigned to the pathology report . In this way ...
Page 38
... discussed in every argument so that the jury has a clear understanding of the burden of proof required of the plaintiff and does not attempt to impose a higher burden . Reflections on the nature and personalities of witnesses both ...
... discussed in every argument so that the jury has a clear understanding of the burden of proof required of the plaintiff and does not attempt to impose a higher burden . Reflections on the nature and personalities of witnesses both ...
Page 57
... discussed the factors which would give rise to a special employment relationship and emphasized that the right to control and direct activities of the alleged employee or the manner and method in which the work was performed was ...
... discussed the factors which would give rise to a special employment relationship and emphasized that the right to control and direct activities of the alleged employee or the manner and method in which the work was performed was ...
Contents
Arne Werchick Esq San Francisco | 9 |
Is the Danger Excessive | 33 |
The Trial of a Medical Malpractice Case | 63 |
5 other sections not shown
Other editions - View all
Common terms and phrases
accident attorney award Barker barred benefit plan breast cancer Cal.Rptr California Supreme Court cause Civil Procedure claims Code of Civil compensation consumer cost counsel CTLA curling iron defendant defendant's deposition design defect determine developer doctor employee ERISA established evaluation Evidence Code expert witness filed foreseeable future damages Hahn hazards hospital hypothetical question indemnity action independent contractor injured worker instructions involved issue judgment jurors jury Labor Code Section legislative Liptak litigation lump manufacturer medical expert medical malpractice medical records motion negligence opinion pain party patient periodic payments physician plaintiff premises presented prior Products Liability reasonable res ipsa result risk Rptr rule safety engineering San Francisco special employer special employment standard statute of limitations statute of repose strict liability subcontractor substantially completed Superior Court supra testify testimony tion tort trial court Trial Lawyers trier of fact utilized verdict victim voir dire Warning