Hilgenberg v. Kazan

How courts have described this case

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

• medical records of testifying expert’s patient were properly excluded as a collateral matter and did not interfere with opposing party’s right to cross-examination
• “[T]he admissibility of evidence is a matter within the sound discretion of the trial judge, whose decision will not be reversed absent a clear abuse of discretion”
• “[T]he admissibility of evidence is a matter within the sound discretion of the trial judge, whose decision will not be reversed absent a clear abuse of discretion”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).