California Trial Lawyers Journal, Volume 19California Trial Lawyers Association., 1981 - Law |
From inside the book
Results 1-3 of 48
Page 79
... question . The reasoning processes , by which the expert proceeds from the facts and material provided in the hypothetical question to his conclusion , is one way in which the trier of fact may determine his credibility and the weight ...
... question . The reasoning processes , by which the expert proceeds from the facts and material provided in the hypothetical question to his conclusion , is one way in which the trier of fact may determine his credibility and the weight ...
Page 21
... question not necessarily restating all pertinent facts by providing assumptions that are made " within the limits of the evidence " and may be used for later impeachment of either the defendant or defense expert . Perkins v . Sunset ...
... question not necessarily restating all pertinent facts by providing assumptions that are made " within the limits of the evidence " and may be used for later impeachment of either the defendant or defense expert . Perkins v . Sunset ...
Page 22
... question may not be necessary , in the more detailed or complex case , because of the length and volume of the material , the hypothetical question presents an opportunity to summarize and argue in advance of the conclusion of the ...
... question may not be necessary , in the more detailed or complex case , because of the length and volume of the material , the hypothetical question presents an opportunity to summarize and argue in advance of the conclusion of the ...
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