Kubik v. Burk

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding issues raised by plaintiff were “beyond the common knowledge of laypersons and require[d] expert evidence”
• finding self-represented plaintiff failed to show good cause for failing to timely designate experts when he was unaware of the timing requirement
• finding summary judgment appropriate when expert testimony is needed but unavailable
• finding summary judgment appropriate when expert testimony is needed but unavailable
• finding summary judgment appropriate when expert testimony is needed but unavailable
• “We do not utilize a deferential standard when persons choose to represent themselves. The law does not judge by two standards, one for lawyers and another for lay persons.” (citation omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).