· 1/26/1985
Douglas v. Lombardino
Citations
- 693 P.2d 1138
- 236 Kan. 471
- 1985 Kan. LEXIS 272
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- giving both specialist and general physician instructions could be confusing if there was a dispute whether a doctor was a specialist
- when a motion in limine is denied, the moving party must object to the evidence at trial to preserve the issue on appeal
- when a motion in limine is denied, the moving party must object to the evidence at trial to preserve the issue on appeal
- motion for new trial based on newly discovered evidence requires supporting affidavit, deposition, or comparable foundation
- when a motion in limine is denied, the moving party must object to the evidence at trial to preserve the issue on appeal
- appellee’s failure to cross-appeal deprived court of jurisdiction to consider appellee’s briefed issues
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Schroeder
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.