Cooper, Robert E. v. Nelson & Company

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that \experts in various fields may rely properly on a wide variety of sources and may employ a similarly wide choice of methodologies in developing an expert opinion\
• pointing out that the jury might disbelieve a doctor’s testimony when an opposing party “elicited testimony that [the doctor] had really done no investigation”
• permitting of admission of medical expert testimony as to the cause of an injury based on subjective complaints
• “[I]n clinical medicine, the methodology of physical examination and self-reported medical history employed by [the physician] is generally appropriate.”
• “The proper method of attacking evidence that is admissible but subject to doubt is to cross-examine vigorously[.]”
• “As a general proposition, a district court has the discretion to treat an allegation in a party’s pleading as a judicial admission.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).