Supreme Court of Missouri· 4/29/1997

Wilkerson v. Prelutsky

Citations

943 S.W.2d 643
1997 Mo. LEXIS 39
1997 WL 206148

How courts have described this case

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

suggesting that the latter is the primary purpose, to assist the appellate court in “understand[ing] the scope and effect of the question and proposed answer in considering whether the judge’s ruling sustaining an objection was proper”
“[T]his Court’s policy is to decide a case on its merits rather than on technical deficiencies in the brief.”
failure to disclose expert witness until a “few weeks” before trial untimely when opposing party was subject to order prohibiting it from retaining new experts
trial court did not abuse its discretion by-excluding the testimony of the plaintiffs treating physician as a sanction for the plaintiffs failure to timely disclose the witness
“this Court's policy is to decide a case on its merits rather than on technical deficiencies in the brief, . . . unless the deficiency impedes disposition on the merits”
“The trial court has broad discretion to control discovery.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Holstein, Benton, Price, Covington, Limbaugh, Robertson, White

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

147 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

16 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.