Gutierrez v. Quinn & Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that a physician willing to speak may impose appropriate conditions on their expert testimony, including “compensation for his time and expertise or payment of reasonable expenses involved”
• “As a general 13 proposition, . . . no party to litigation has anything resembling a proprietary right to any witness’s 14 evidence.”
• ‘‘[e]ven an expert whose knowledge has been purchased cannot be silenced by the party who is paying him on that ground alone’’
• \[N]o party to litigation has anything resembling a proprietary right to any witness's evidence. Absent a privilege no party is entitled to restrict an opponent's access to a witness....\
• “[N]o party to litigation has anything resembling a proprietary right to any witness’s evidence. Absent a privilege no party is entitled to restrict an opponent’s access to a witness....”
• “[N]o party to litigation has anything resembling a proprietary right to any witness’s evidence.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).