 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Jones v. ITT Hartford Insurance Co.12/3/1999
ty of expert witnesses expected to be called at trial. Exclusion of an expert's testimony is an appropriate sanction for failure of a party to comply with these rules.
In the instant case, the trial court reviewed the plaintiff's response, and in overruling the defendant's motion in limine, held "a reasonable interpretation of that interrogatory is sufficient to deal with these issues and put all parties on notice thereof." We cannot say that the trial court abused its discretion in denying the defendant's motion to exclude the testimony of Dr. Cates. Lyle v. Exxon Corp., 746 S.W.2d 694, 699 (Tenn. 1987).
We affirm the trial court's judgment. The costs of this cause are taxed to the defendant for all of which execution may issue.
L. T. LAFFERTY, SENIOR JUDGE
CONCUR:
JANICE M. HOLDER, JUSTICE
F. LLOYD TATUM, SENIOR JUDGE
JUDGMENT ORDER
This case is before the Court upon the entire record, including the order of referral to the Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel, and the Panel's Memorandum Opinion setting forth its findings of fact and Conclusions of law, which are incorporated herein by reference. Whereupon, it appears to the Court that the Memorandum Opinion of the Panel should be accepted and approved; and It is, therefore, ordered that the Panel's findings of fact and Conclusions of law are adopted and affirmed, and the decision of the Panel is made the judgment of the Court. Costs will be paid by the Defendants, for which execution may issue if necessary.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 3rd day of December, 1999.
PER CURIAM
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 Tennessee Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|