Commonwealth v. Noll

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the prosecution could not retain as a testifying expert for trial a non-testifying expert the defendant had previously retained
• holding that the prosecution could not retain as a testifying expert for trial a non-testifying expert the defendant had previously retained
• holding that the work-product doctrine, inter alia, barred the Commonwealth from calling an expert accident reconstructionist, originally hired by the defense, as a witness at trial
• holding that the work-product doctrine, inter alia, barred the Commonwealth from calling an expert accident reconstructionist, originally hired by the defense, as a witness at trial
• noting that the attorney hired an accident reconstruction expert \to assist in preparation for possible litigation.\
• noting that the attorney hired an accident reconstruction expert “to assist in preparation for possible litigation.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).