Legal Opinion

Johnston-Forbes v. Matsunaga

Washington Supreme Court

Decided August 28, 2014No. 89625-9PublishedCited by 28 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

¶1 This case concerns whether, under Rules of Evidence (ER) 702 through 705, the trial court properly admitted expert biomechanical testimony in an automobile collision case. In August 2006, Dawn Matsunaga rear-ended the car that Cathy Johnston-Forbes was riding in. Johnston-Forbes claimed that she suffered injuries as a result of the collision and sued Matsunaga. Before trial, Matsunaga identified Dr. Allan Tencer as an expert who would be testifying as a biomechanical engineer. In a motion in limine, Johnston-Forbes moved to exclude Tencer’s testimony, arguing that he was not qualified as…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Frye v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1923
  2. Group Health Cooperative of Puget Sound, Inc. v. Department of RevenueWashington Supreme Court · 1986
  3. In re the Marriage of KatareWashington Supreme Court · 2012
  4. Philippides v. BernardWashington Supreme Court · 2004
  5. Philippides v. BernardWashington Supreme Court · 2004

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

3Cited by28 opinions

  1. Taylor v. BellCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2014
  2. Gilmore v. Jefferson County Pub. Transp. Benefit AreaWashington Supreme Court · 2018
  3. State Of Washington v. Daren M. MoralesCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2016
  4. L.M. by and Through Dussault v. HamiltonWashington Supreme Court · 2019
  5. Christopher W. Sartin v. Alonzo McpikeCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2020

23 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