 |
|
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Green v. Alfred A.8/9/2000 anifest. For at least six months before the actual trial, Green's counsel obviously relied on the understanding that he would be permitted to use Dr. Sponseller's deposition at trial. Even after the defendants had retained a new expert, before the second pretrial conference, the pretrial stipulation reflected permission to use Dr. Sponseller's testimony. It was only on the second day of trial when Green attempted to present portions of the deposition that an objection was made. At that juncture, there was no time available for Green to secure alternate expert testimony, and, indeed, any effort to do so could have been rejected as late disclosure of an expert witness. Under the circumstances, the Superior Court should not have prevented the use of Dr. Sponseller's deposition in Green's case-in-chief -- an error compounded when Green was further prevented from using Dr. Sponseller's deposition in rebuttal. The combined rulings represent an abuse of discretion. In view of the obvious impact on Green's ability to present evidence of medical malpractice, we must reverse.
The judgment of the Superior Court denying plaintiff's motion for a new trial is REVERSED and this matter is REMANDED to the Superior Court for a new trial.
Page 1 2 3 4 5 Delaware Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
|
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|