Richaud

Richaud v. Jennings

Good Law
16 Cal. App. 4th 81·19 Cal. Rptr. 2d 790·19 Cal. Rptr. 790·1993 Cal. App. LEXIS 568·93 Daily Journal DAR 7100
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 28, 1993F017162California3,693 words

Opinion

Opinion

Ardaiz, J.

In this appeal from a consent judgment entered in favor of respondent in a medical malpractice action, appellant contends that the trial court erred in granting respondent’s motion in limine to exclude from the trial any expert testimony of appellant’s only orthopedic expert. We affirm.

Facts

Plaintiff and appellant Jerry Ann Richaud filed a medical malpractice action against defendant and respondent W. Kenneth Jennings, M.D., on or about January 16, 1990. Respondent answered the complaint on or about March 21, 1990, and trial of the matter was set for August 26, 1991.

On or about June 17, 1991, respondent served appellant with a demand for exchange of expert witness information. The demand identified July 5, 1991, as the date for exchange of such information. On July 5, appellant served respondent with appellant’s “Designation of Expert Witnesses” listing three experts.

On or about July 12, 1991, the law office of Greenblatt & Associates substituted in as attorney of record for appellant in place of the law office of Stephen R. Wolfson.

On August 9, appellant filed a motion requesting a 60-day continuance of the August 26 trial date. Appellant’s written motion…

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.