 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Schreiber v. Estate of Kiser11/30/1998
intended to put parties on an equal footing regarding the merits of litigation -- should not be reduced to a simple litigation technique to allow one side to win regardless of the merits. As Plunkett indicates, courts should be liberal in granting relief for the failure to provide expert witness declarations.
The second aspect involves the actual requirements of the declaration required by subdivision (f)(2). Again, trial courts should not treat these requirements as ways to dispose of cases without regard to the merits. The phrase "general substance" as it is used in subdivision (f)(2)(B), for example, has also been liberally construed so as to allow testimony to come in. (See Castaneda v. Bornstein (1995) 36 Cal.App.3d at pp. 1826-1829.) It doesn't take much to put the other side on notice of the "general substance" of the expert's testimony. In this case just the word "causation" would have sufficed.
Here, however, the subdivision (l) escape valve has not been raised on appeal and there was no declaration at all. The judgment must accordingly be affirmed.
WE CONCUR: WALLIN, J. CROSBY, J.
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 California Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|