Sammons v. Doctors for Emergency Services, P.A.

How courts have described this case

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

• affirming a trial court order restricting expert testimony finding it is unreasonable for counsel to go on a proverbial wild goose chase without the benefit of their scientific reasoning for those opinions
• explaining, in the context of a jury trial, that “[p]arties must comply with the discovery rules by identifying expert witnesses and disclosing the substance of their expected opinions as a precondition to the admissibility of expert testimony at trial”
• \The standard of review on appeal of a trial judge's decision to give a curative instruction is abuse of discretion.\
• “Plaintiff was to identify her experts and provide their reports as to their expert opinions. Then, Defendant would be on notice of the bases for the expert opinions, and....respond in kind as to their experts and supply the bases for their opinions by way of a report”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).