Zartner v. City & County of Denver

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that as fact witnesses, treating doctors in medical malpractice cases may testify in opinion form about their diagnoses and treatment of patients' disorders, including their determinations of disorders’ causes
• holding that videotaped depositions of the plaintiff's treating physicians were admissible because the plaintiffs had consulted the doctors for treatment, not in anticipation of litigation or in preparation of trial
• holding \the characterization of [such] testimony as 'fact' or 'opinion' creates an artificial distinction\
• \[T]he probative value of the treating doctors' testimony outweighs its prejudicial effect under N.J.R.E. 403\ because of their first hand proximity to the patient's condition.
• A treating physician may testify about the cause of a patient's disease or injury and that testimony, while factual, may be in the form of opinion
• \We would ill-serve the cause of truth and justice if we were to exclude relevant and credible evidence only because it might help one side and adversely affect the other.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).