Mosesian

Mosesian v. Pennwalt Corp.

Bad Law
191 Cal. App. 3d 851·1987 Cal. App. LEXIS 1687·236 Cal. Rptr. 778
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 4, 1987F003781California5,709 words

Opinion

Opinion

Ballantyne, J.

Introduction

The instant action arose after Charles Mosesian allegedly suffered crop losses on Madera grapevines in 1979 from application of Kryocide pesticide. Defendant Pennwalt Corporation (hereafter Pennwalt) manufactured and defendant Helena Chemical Company (hereafter Helena) sold the Kryocide.

The six-week jury trial ended with a defense verdict. The trial court then granted the plaintiff’s motion for a new trial on the ground that prejudicial hearsay statements from outside experts were brought into evidence through the testimony of Pennwalt’s primary expert witness, Dr. Whaley.

The primary issue to be determined on this appeal is whether there was error in permitting Dr. Whaley to testify to the content of hearsay opinions of other experts and, if this was error, whether the error was prejudicial.

Facts

Charles Mosesian has been farming Thompson seedless grapes in Madera County since 1964. In 1979, Mosesian’s Libbee and Railroad Ranches, along with most San Joaquin Valley vineyards, were being threatened by the omnivorous leaf roller and the grape leaf folder. These worms can destroy entire crops if left uncontrolled. Pennwalt produces Kryocide pesticide, an…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.