Cook ex rel. Cook v. Agency for Persons with Disabilities District: 02 Gadsden Unit: APD

How courts have described this case

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

• determining that testimony of prior misconduct reasonably permitted inference that defendant previously administered chloral hydrate despite lack of evidence showing defendant actually administered drugs or there were drugs in witness’ system
• talismanic phraseology not necessary when appellate court can infer that trial court conducted balancing test
• “on a certified appeal, our focus is on the judgment of the Appellate Court . . . and we ordinarily do not review claims not raised therein” [citation omitted]
• expert testimony concerning effects of chloral hydrate sufficient for jury to find that “the effects felt by the victim were consistent with those effects that one would expect after ingesting chloral hydrate”
• “on a certified appeal, our focus is on the judgment of the Appellate Court . . . and we ordinarily do not review claims not raised therein” [citation omitted]
• term ‘‘reason- able medical certainty’’ means ‘‘reasonable medical probability standard,’’ which is standard that is applied to ensure that expert opinions are not based on mere speculation or conjecture

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).