 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Kuespert v. Treloar3/9/2000
he testified about his routine. And, admission of the testimony probably would have prompted Dr. Treloar to offer other patients' testimony to support his testimonial assertions. The resulting waste of time, coupled with the marginal probative value of the evidence when viewed in the context of other contradicting evidence, supports the trial court's exercise of discretion here. Nor was it an abuse of discretion to exclude the testimony as evidence of Dr. Treloar's alleged habit not to inform patients of the risks. His conduct in two or three patients' cases does not rise to the level of a habitual, semi-automatic act. There was no error.
Affirmed.
The majority of the panel has determined this opinion will not be printed in the Washington Appellate Reports, but it will be filed for public record pursuant to RCW 2.06.040.
Kurtz, C.J.
WE CONCUR:
Sweeney, J.
Kato, J.
Page 1 2 3 4 5 Washington Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|