 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
S.C.A.C.D.11/6/2002
R>
Thus, the reasonableness of plaintiff's actions in relying on the old guaranties was not an issue of consequence to the determination of the action. Therefore, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to allow Mr. Flood to testify.
Harrison's reliance on Fatica v. Superior Court is misplaced. There, Division Three of this court held that the trial court abused its discretion by refusing to allow a plaintiff's orthopedic surgeon to testify in the plaintiff's personal injury action. The orthopedic surgeon's testimony was plainly relevant and even "critical" to the plaintiff's case. Here, in contrast, Mr. Flood's testimony would not have assisted the trier of fact in any way.
4. Disposition
The judgment is affirmed. Plaintiff shall recover its reasonable attorney's fees and costs on appeal, and the trial court shall determine the amounts.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
We concur:
Ramirez P. J.
Hollenhorst J.
Page 1 2 3 4 5 California Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|