Karl v. Davis

How courts have described this case

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

• counsel’s “misplaced reliance” on expert’s deposition not rendered to a reasonable degree of medical probability did not demonstrate a lack of good faith in “appellant’s approach to the mandated arbitration process”
• “Except in cases where the medical negligence alleged is of such gross and obvious nature that a layman can comprehend the breach of care, the standard of care and breach thereof must be shown by expert testimony.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).