Waetcher v. Laser Spine Inst., L.L.C.

Citations

• 2023 Ohio 3715

Syllabus

Motion for new trial Civ.R. 59(A) Evid.R. 601 Evid.R. 601(B)(5) expert witness liability proximate cause abuse of discretion de novo invited error plain error opening statements closing arguments professional conduct. Judgment affirmed. The trial court properly denied plaintiff-appellant's motion for a new trial under Civ.R. 59(A)(1), (2), and (9). The trial court did not abuse its discretion or err when it allowed the defendant-appellee's proximate cause expert witness to testify found that plaintiff-appellant's motion to disqualify the expert was untimely permitted the use of a demonstrative illustration and provided defense counsel with wide latitude to present opening statements and closing arguments. We find that plaintiff-appellant's counsel invited error by opening the door to the defense's proximate cause expert's standard-of-care testimony on cross-examination and that the expert's testimony on direct examination was not contrary to Evid.R. 601(B)(5). We further find that plaintiff-appellant withdrew her objections or failed to object to the use of the demonstrative illustration and to many of the allegedly false and prejudicial comments made by defense counsel during opening statements and closing arguments. We decline to find plain error in those instances. Nor do we find that defense counsel lacked candor, was unfair to Waechter or her attorney, or lacked impartiality and decorum to constitute the need for a new trial. Thus, we cannot say that the trial court abused its discretion or committed error of law when it denied plaintiff-appellant's motion for a new trial.