Tetrault v. Fairchild

How courts have described this case

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

• ordering a new trial where treating physician gave opinion testimony based on MRIs he had not seen during treatment
• ordering a new trial where treating physician gave opinion testimony based on MRIs he had not seen during treatment
• reversing when a “fact witness” radiologist gave his opinion at trial about MRIs he had not, seen before
• reversing a verdict in plaintiffs’ favor where the trial court allowed the plaintiffs’ medical expert to testify based on MRIs even though the plaintiff had not disclosed the topic of the testimony during discovery
• treating physician was expert witness because he \was called by the plaintiff not to testify to his 'care and treatment' of plaintiff but to render an opinion as a neuroradiologist based upon his review of MRIs supplied to him in plaintiff's counsel's office\
• treating physician was expert witness because he “was called by the plaintiff not to testify to his ‘care and treatment’ of plaintiff but to render an opinion as a neuroradiologist based upon his review of MRIs supplied to him in plaintiff’s counsel’s office”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).