Evidence

Ineligible Expert Insufficient to Justify Continuance, Court Rules

, The Legal Intelligencer

   | 0 Comments

A legal malpractice plaintiff is not entitled to a continuance to seek an expert to testify despite learning shortly before a scheduled trial that his intended expert was ineligible, the Pennsylvania Superior Court has ruled.

This premium content is reserved for The Legal Intelligencer subscribers.

Continue reading by getting started with a subscription.

Already a subscriber? Log in now

What's being said

Comments are not moderated. To report offensive comments, click here.

Preparing comment abuse report for Article #1202782690932

Thank you!

This article's comments will be reviewed.