Laberge v. Vancleave

How courts have described this case

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

• “Regardless of the quality of the experts’ testimony, * * * the question of whether a plaintiff has suffered a permanent injury is one for the jury.”
• directed verdict that Vancleave suffered permanent injury reversed because one expert's testimony of no permanent physical injury and no opinion about a soft tissue injury conflicted with other expert's testimony of a soft tissue injury

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).