Gicla v. United States

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that the factfinder must determine what weight and credibility to give the testimony of each expert and physician
• noting that a “battle of the experts” requires “the factfinder to determine what weight and credibility to give the testimony of each expert and physician”
• noting that a “battle of the experts” requires “the factfinder to determine what weight and credibility to give the testimony of each expert and physician”
• observing that the case “pre‐ sented a classic battle of the experts … [that] called upon the factfinder to determine what weight and credibility to give to each expert”
• noting the case involved “a classic battle of the experts . . . [that] called upon the factfinder to determine what weight and credibility to give to each expert”
• finding no prejudice where expert’s “eleventh-hour review” of Page 9 of 12 evidence did not alter his already-disclosed opinions and other party was given recess at a bench trial to confer and then cross examine

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).