Swaw v. Klompien

How courts have described this case

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

• proximate cause established by expert testimony that injury was caused by treating doctor’s failure to treat plaintiffs hematoma
• no reversible error where plaintiff elicited opinion through hypothetical question assuming fact not in evidence and defendant revised facts of hypothetical question on cross-examination
• proximate cause established by expert testimony that injury was caused by treating doctor's failure to treat plaintiff's hematoma
• “An expert’s statement as to what he would have done in the situation encountered by the defendant doctors is irrelevant since the issue at trial is whether the defendant acted contrary to the standard of care”
• \An expert’s statement as to what he would have done in the situation encountered by the defendant doctors is irrelevant since the issue at trial is whether the defendant acted contrary to the standard of care\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).