State v. Keasling

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that it was error to admit the testimony of an architect as to how a particular wall could have been made to be safer
• holding that it was error to admit the testimony of an architect as to how a particular wall could have been made to be safer
• holding it was error to permit an architect to testify to the effect that a low wall outside the exit of defendant’s store was hazardous

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).