Chapman v. Hubbard Woods Motors, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• the trial court did not abuse its discretion in disallowing the testimony when the basis provided was a “catch-all” provision, unconnected with any specific witness or opinion
• the trial court did not abuse its discretion in disallowing the testimony when the basis provided was a “catch-all” provision, unconnected with any specific witness or opinion
• the trial court did not abuse its discretion in disallowing the testimony when the basis provided was a “catch-all” provision, unconnected with any specific witness or opinion
• evidence opposing party originally hired expert has probative value
• evidence opposing party originally hired expert has probative value
• “Even though the subject of Linda’s friendship with Mr. Berger was not brought out on direct examination, it would have been proper for the plaintiffs’ attorney to question her about it to reveal any bias she would have had in favor of Hubbard Woods Motors.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).