Dennis H. Hagenow and Rosalee A. Hagenow v. Betty L. Schmidt

How courts have described this case

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

• holding no abuse of discretion occurred when testimony was allowed that was disclosed two months before trial and no unfair prejudice occurred
• concluding error was harmless where the defendant prevailed on the sudden-emergency defense and the district court’s wording of the sudden-emergency instruction made it more difficult to prove the defense
• concluding error was harmless where the defendant prevailed on the sudden-emergency defense and the district court’s wording of the sudden-emergency instruction made it more difficult to prove the defense
• confirming the trial court has broad discretion related to rulings allowing or disallowing expert testimony challenged as untimely
• “[T]he duty to 8 supplement seeks to clarify issues prior to trial, avoid surprise to parties, and allow a complete opportunity to prepare for trial.”
• “[Neither the parties nor the district court raised the provisions of the Restatement (Third) when instructing the jury in this case. We defer for another day our consideration of these provisions — ”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).