Mattek v. White

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that defendant's expert in accident reconstruction and biomechanical engineering, who was not a medical doctor, was not qualified to opine on the extent of plaintiffs injury
• holding that defendant's expert in accident reconstruction and biomechanical engineering, who was not a medical doctor, was not qualified to opine on the extent of plaintiffs injury
• holding that defendant's expert in accident reconstruction and biomechanical engineering, who was not a medical doctor, was not qualified to opine on the extent of plaintiffs injury
• holding that defendant's expert in accident reconstruction and biomechanical engineering, who was not a medical doctor, was not qualified to opine on the extent of plaintiffs injury
• physicist presented as expert on accident reconstruction and biomechanics was not qualified to give expert opinion that motorist did not suffer permanent injury

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).