Louise Evans v. Mathis Funeral Home, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that the District Court did not abuse its discretion by excluding expert testimony that uneven and poorly lit steps could have contributed to the plaintiff’s fall because the potential effect of those factors was “within the common knowledge of the jurors”
• explaining that the District Court did not abuse its discretion by excluding expert testimony that uneven and poorly lit steps could have contributed to the plaintiff’s fall because the potential effect of those factors was “within the common knowledge of the jurors”
• “In barring the expert’s testimony as to the probable effect of each of these factors in causing Evans to fall, the district court first found that the effects of the first three factors (the uneven risers and treads, the brick patio and steps, and the handrail height

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).