Wilson v. Rivers

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the trial court erred in refusing to qualify a medical doctor as an expert in biomechanics where the doctor had training in biomechanics, had been qualified as a biomechanics expert in other states, and had some educational background in biomechanics
• holding that the trial court erred in refusing to qualify a medical doctor as an expert in biomechanics where the doctor had training in biomechanics, had been qualified as a biomechanics expert in other states, and had some educational background in biomechanics
• noting expert \was better qualified than the jury to evaluate the force of a moving vehicle on the human body\
• finding the trial court erred in not qualifying an expert in the field of biomechanics when he was a medical doctor with a doctorate in human physiology and training in biomechanics and he had been qualified as an expert in the field of biomechanics in other states

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).