Personal Injury Lawyer Blog
(Please note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this brain injury/personal injury case and its proceedings.)
It is worth noting that situations similar to those described in this case could just as easily occur at any of the healthcare facilities in the area, such as Kaiser Permanente, U.C. Davis Medical Center, Mercy General, or Sutter Hospital.
ON CROSS-EXAMINATION, A BRAIN INJURY EXPERT MAY BE CROSS-EXAMINED REGARDING MATTERS THAT HAVE BEEN ESTABLISHED AS RELIABLE AUTHORITIES
Evidence Code §721(b) provides as follows:
(b) If a witness testifying as an expert testifies in the form of an opinion, he or she may not be cross-examined in regard to the content or tenor of any scientific, technical, or professional text, treatise, journal, or similar publication unless any of the following occurs:
(1) The witness referred to, considered, or relied upon such publication in arriving at or forming his or her opinion.
(2) The publication has been admitted in evidence.
(3) The publication has been established as a reliable authority by the testimony or admission of the witness or by other expert testimony or by judicial notice. For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.
Pursuant to the said section, once the item of medical literature has been established as a reliable authority by the expert’s testimony, that reliable authority may be utilized to cross-examine the defense expert.
Plaintiff has thus taken great lengths to provide in her Exhibit Notebook the various medical literature that has been established as reliable authorities by the testimony of plaintiff’s expert, Dr. Ibric. These Exhibits are not intended to be introduced on their own but are identified for purposes of Dr. Stein’s testifying that they are reliable authorities and then for use in cross-examining the defense experts.
CONCLUSION
For the reasons stated above, defendant’s motion in limine must be denied. It is simply a restatement of existing law and misses the point for which plaintiff has identified the various medical literature.
For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.