Willis v. Cresey

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that, in Hickman, “[the] substance of [the] expert’s answers provided [the] jury with an explanation of the standard of care even though the technical legal standard was not stated verbatim”
• noting basic premise of MAI is to submit only ultimate issues and avoid evidentiary detail
• noting basic premise of MAI is to submit only ultimate issues and avoid evidentiary detail
• denying a similar claim and holding that the addition of the phrase “as submitted by Instruction No. 11” to verdict form “did not mislead the jury”
• denying a similar claim and holding that the addition of the phrase “as submitted by Instruction No. 11” to verdict form “did not mislead the jury”
• addressing physician-defendant’s claim that “it was error to deny his motions for directed verdict and JNOV because Patient failed to present [competent] evidence of a causal connection between his injury and Surgeon's alleged negligence”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).