The defendant called a doctor to testify as a medical expert.
Not exact matches
The
Defendant brought an application to re-open the case and
call the
doctor to prove the statement.
Given that the plaintiff
called evidence from 4
doctors who, at least according to the trial judge said the negligence was the probable cause, and the
defendant called 2 who said it was not, the facts of Fisherseem to not invoke the impossibility condition (at least to me).
Both she and the
defendants called different
doctors as expert witnesses.
To survive the
defendant's motion, the plaintiff argued that she would be
calling her
doctor as an expert witness to testify that the second accident caused or substantially aggravated her injuries.
[34] In these circumstances, the
defendants urge me to draw an adverse inference from the plaintiff's failure to
call evidence from her family
doctor...
Darryl Cruz, partner at McCarthy Tétrault LLP and counsel to the
doctor who was named as the
defendant in the first medical action, says he thought the judge made the right
call.