Skip to main content
· 9/29/1970

Plank v. Holman

Citations

  • 264 N.E.2d 12
  • 46 Ill. 2d 465
  • 1970 Ill. LEXIS 502

How courts have described this case

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

  • finding that the truth-seeking process is best served by requiring direct evidence, rather than secondary evidence
  • finding that the truth-seeking process is best served by requiring direct evidence, rather than secondary evidence
  • stating that “expert reconstruction testimony is proper, even where there is an eyewitness, if what the expert offers is ‘knowledge and application of principles of science beyond the ken of the average juror’ ”
  • expert testimony is proper if it offers \knowledge and application of principles of science beyond the ken of the average juror\
  • expert testimony is proper if it offers “knowledge and application of principles of science beyond the ken of the average juror”
  • expert testimony is proper if it offers \knowledge and application of principles of science beyond the ken of the average juror\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: O'Brien

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.