|
P1565 Although plaintiff's expert testified at a deposition that he had not formed an opinion regarding the cause of plaintiff's injury, notice to defendant's attorney three months before the scheduled trial date that the expert would testify regarding causation was sufficient to require that the expert be permitted to testify regarding causation; an expert's inconsistent statements during his/her testimony are appropriately considered by the trier of the fact in considering credibility, but are not relevant to admissibility of the testimony.CitationEASTERBY v CLARK (Expert Exchange) 171 CA4 772 [See: CCP 2034.210, 2034.260; Kennemur v State 133 CA3 907; Jones v Moore 80 CA4 557, T/AT 6/00; Bonds v Roy 20 C4 140, T/AT 5/99]
|
|
