Chrysler Credit Corp. v. Bert Cote's L/A Auto Sales, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that opinion that was “derived from ... specialized knowledge ... and was not within the realm of the ordinary layperson” did not qualify as lay opinion under M.R. Evid. 701
• finding that the court abused its discretion when it allowed a witness to testify as a surprise expert
• plaintiff did not know until defendant’s witness testified that he would be an expert, not just a fact witness

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).