Legal Opinion · Dissent

Ross v. Moore

Court of Appeals of Arkansas

Decided March 7, 1990No. CA 89-270Published

1DissentJudith Rogers, Judge

Because I cannot agree with the majority that the trial court abused its discretion in admitting the blood test report into evidence, I dissent.

In 1985, the General Assembly amended Ark. Stat. Ann. Section 34-705.2 to provide that a written report of the blood test results by a duly qualified expert performing the tests, certified by an affidavit duly subscribed and sworn to by him before a notary public, may be produced in paternity actions without calling the expert as a witness; and, if either party desires to question the expert, the party shall have him subpoenaed within a reasonable…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Henderson v. RussellSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1979
  2. Thompson v. YountsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1984
  3. Dildine v. Clark Equipment Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1984
  4. Feagin v. EverettCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 1983
  5. Firemen's Insurance Co. v. LittleSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1934

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API