K-Mart Corp. v. Honeycutt

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that an expert witness should be excluded “[w]hen the jury is equally competent to form an opinion about the ultimate fact issues”
• holding that it was within the jury’s ability to determine on its own whether lack of a railing caused the accident
• holding that it was within the jury = s ability to determine on its own whether lack of a railing caused the accident
• holding testimony of human factors and safety expert was not necessary to help the jury determine whether conditions at store created an unreasonable risk of injury
• concluding jury did not need an expert’s opinion in determining if the lack of a top railing was unreasonable when it could view photographs and draw its own conclusion
• holding trial court acted within its discretion in excluding expert -7- 04-10-00682-CV testimony

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).