Marshall v. Mayflower Transit, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• finding a proffer of expert testimony was sufficient because the court read the deposition prior to trial, the testimony was included in a pretrial motion, the court heard arguments on the matter, and the court allowed a written proffer to be filed posttrial
• in order to preserve the issue for appeal, proffer must contain the substance of the excluded testimony
• “The standard for a satisfactory proffer is whether the proffer contains the substance of the excluded testimony.”
• proffer of excluded expert testimony submitted after trial
• no accident reconstruction expert needed to establish causation

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).