Wage-Loss Claim • Preclusion of Expert Testimony • Crimen Falsi Evidence
Crespo v. Hughes, PICS Case No. 17-1227 (Pa. Super. July 18, 2017) Ransom, J. (35 pages).
Trial court erred in precluding plaintiff’s conviction for receipt of stolen property, where crimen falsi evidence was per se admissible, and where evidence of the conviction was relevant to plaintiff’s wage-loss claim. Judgment reversed in part and affirmed in part, case remanded for new trial on damages.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
