(Please note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this bus accident/personal injury case and its proceedings.) 6. All eyewitnesses at trial contradicted Ms. White’s hearsay testimony. During trial, the jury was presented testimony of three eye witnesses other…
(Please note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this bus accident/personal injury case and its proceedings.) 4. In the present case, Officer Smith had no physical evidence to support his jaywalking opinion. There was no physical evidence that…
(Please note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this bus accident/personal injury case and its proceedings.) 3. Further, since Officer Smith’s opinion does not fit into any legally recognized exception to this rule, his opinion is inadmissible. The…
(Please note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this bus accident/personal injury case and its proceedings.) 1. Officer Smith’s opinion was based exclusively on one unreliable hearsay witness: Petra White. What Petra White told Officer Smith at the…
(Please note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this bus accident/personal injury case and its proceedings.) D. There was an error in law in permitting Officer Smith to testify as to Chance’s Vehicle Code Violation where he was…
(Please note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this bus accident/personal injury case and its proceedings.) 3. Percipient non-party witness #3, Kim Perry saw Ms Chance walking “normal for an old person” in the crosswalk before a big…
(Please note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this bus accident/personal injury case and its proceedings.) SUMMARY OF EYEWITNESS TESTIMONY All three non-party eyewitnesses testified they saw a pedestrian (Chance) walking in the crosswalk before the turning bus…
(Please note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this bus accident/personal injury case and its proceedings.) Although Chance’s ten-year-old car accident failed to illuminate any issue before the jury, the information did help assuage any pangs the juror’s…
(Please note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this bus accident/personal injury case and its proceedings.) B. It was an abuse of discretion for the court to allow remote, irrelevant but highly prejudicial testimony to be admitted concerning…
(Please note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this bus accident/personal injury case and its proceedings.) LEGAL STANDARD FOR MOTION C.C.P. section 657 provides, in part: The verdict may be vacated and any other decision may be modified…