Daddona v. Thind

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that the expert’s pre-trial report clearly indicated that he had reviewed the plaintiff’s medical records, where the diagnostic tests were performed. Thus, his testimony about the diagnostic tests was not beyond the scope of his report.
• “[C]ompulsory non-suit can only be granted in cases where it is clear a cause of action was not established.”
• “No prejudice is apparent from [the expert’s] - 25 - J-A05003-26 testimony describing a photograph attached to his report.” (citation omitted)
• “Contrary to Plaintiffs’ assertions, the mere fact that the words “diffuse axonal injury” do not appear in Dr. Banks’ pre-trial report does not automatically require exclusion of this testimony.” (citations omitted)
• “The decision whether to admit or exclude the testimony of a witness is within the sound discretion of the trial court and will not be reversed absent an abuse of discretion.”
• indicating purpose of Pa.R.C.P. 4003.5 is to avoid unfair surprise

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).