During the trial of this negligence action, the jury requested that the court allow them to rehear that portion of the testimony of the medical expert, Dr. Ruch, which related to permanency. This testimony was vague and confusing and supports the conclusion that the jury was indeed confused. The court should not have denied the jury's request which, in our view, constituted prejudicial error, and in the interest of justice the verdict should be set aside and a new trial granted...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.
