Cenatus v. Naples Community Hosp., Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding it reversible error to exclude doctor's testimony even though other expert testimony was offered on the same topic where it was clear from the record that the doctor was intended to be the primary expert on behalf of the plaintiff
• “Although Cenatus offered other expert testimony, it is clear from the record that Dr. Weintzen was intended to be the primary expert on behalf of the plaintiff.”
• “Even if expert testimony is cumulative, excluding such testimony is harmful because ‘[a] medical malpractice case is always necessarily a battle of expert witnesses.’ ” (quoting Lake v. Clark, 533 So.2d 797, 799 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988))

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).