Don’t forget you can visit MyAlerts to manage your alerts at any time.
213 results for '* topic:"Evidence"' You can use Search Constraints to get even better search results
Publication Date: 2020-09-21
Practice Area: Evidence
Industry: Pharmaceuticals
Court: U.S. District Court for Pennsylvania - Eastern
Judge: District Judge Rufe
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 20-1035
Drug manufacturer's motion for the continued sealing of certain expert reports failed, except as to the redaction of study subject personal information, because the common law presumption of public access, the lack of harm manufacturer would face, the significance of the litigation and number of people affected required public disclosure. Motion denied in part and granted in part.
Publication Date: 2020-08-31
Practice Area: Evidence
Industry:
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Judge: Circuit Judge Smith
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 20-0945
Defendant appealed the exclusion of his proffered expert testimony as to his intent in his 18 U.S.C. §2251(a) charges and court found it could not review an adjunct-presented non-ruling that caused defendant to plead guilty where law clerk told counsel that judge would exclude the evidence under F.R.E. 403 and 704(b) but no formal ruling, order or opinion was ever docketed. Vacated and remanded.
Publication Date: 2020-08-17
Practice Area: Evidence
Industry:
Court: Superior Court
Judge: Judge Stevens
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 20-0875
The trial court abused its discretion in excluding evidence related to the causation of the victim's death based on the dismissal of criminal homicide chargesas such evidence was relevant to the remaining charge of aggravated assault and whether defendant caused the victim serious bodily injury that created a "substantial risk of death." The superior court reversed and remanded.
Publication Date: 2020-08-10
Practice Area: Evidence
Industry: Chemicals and Materials | Manufacturing
Court: Supreme Court
Judge: Justice Donohue
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 20-0859
Superior court properly reversed trial court's grant of pesticide manufacturers' Frye motion in product liability action because trial court abused its discretion by reviewing the scientific literature at a granular level to make its own judgments about which studies relied on by plaintiff's experts were scientifically acceptable. Affirmed.
Publication Date: 2020-04-27
Practice Area: Evidence
Industry: Health Care
Court: Superior Court
Judge: Judge Olson
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 20-0428
The trial court erred in finding that the psychotherapist-client privilege in 42 Pa.C.S. §5944 applied to incriminating statements defendant made to a fellow patient while at a mental health treatment center since he did not make the statements to a member of his treatment team during treatment and the statements were not confidential. The superior court vacated in part and remanded.
Law Journal Press | Digital Book
Authors: Shari L. Klevens, Alanna G. Clair
View this BookView more book results for the query "*"
Publication Date: 2020-02-24
Practice Area: Evidence | Health Care Law
Industry: Health Care
Court: Superior Court
Judge: Judge Dubow
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 20-0204
Hospital appealed discovery order directing it to produce the unredacted credentialing file for physician and court found trial court properly relied on Reginelli v Boggs, 181 A.3d 293, to order production of the file since the credentialing committee was a "review organization" and the Healthcare Quality Improvement Act also did not preclude production of the file. Affirmed.
Publication Date: 2020-01-06
Practice Area: Evidence
Industry:
Court: Superior Court
Judge: Judge Shogan
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 19-1511
The trial court did not abuse its discretion in finding defendant's young daughter competent to testify as a witness at trial where she demonstrated an ability to distinguish between the truth and a lie and her testimony regarding defendant's sexual abuse of her was admissible as evidence of prior bad acts proving a common scheme, plan or design. The appellate court affirmed.
Publication Date: 2019-11-25
Practice Area: Evidence
Industry:
Court: Superior Court
Judge: Judge Bender
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 19-1376
The trial court erred in admitting a hearsay statement implicating defendant in the operation of an alleged house of prostitution where the witness who made the testimonial statement was unavailable and defendant did not have an opportunity to cross-examine her. The appellate court vacated defendant's judgment of sentence.
Publication Date: 2019-11-25
Practice Area: Evidence
Industry:
Court: U.S. District Court for Pennsylvania - Middle
Judge: District Judge Rambo
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 19-1392
Defendant made pretrial motions to suppress voice identifications and bank records and dismiss identify theft counts in his trial for money laundering, identity theft and mail fraud and court found voice identification was allowed under F.R.E. 901 as opinion evidence, the subpoena was sufficient to obtain his bank records and the counterfeit DD 214 forms defendant submitted qualified as a "means of identification." Motions denied.
Publication Date: 2019-11-11
Practice Area: Evidence | Personal Injury
Industry:
Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Lycoming County
Judge: Judge Linhardt
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 19-1275
Plaintiff's chronic marijuana use was relevant and admissible to the issues of his future earning capacity and his future life expectancy, though evidence of plaintiff's chronic marijuana use as a factor relevant to his future life expectancy required expert testimony. The court granted in part and denied in part plaintiff's motion in limine.
Legal Speak is a weekly podcast that makes sense of what’s happening in the legal industry.
1 minute read