Legal Opinion

Krause Inc. v. Little

Nevada Supreme Court

Decided November 21, 2001No. 36406PublishedCited by 44 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

By the Court,

Rose, L:

This appeal presents two novel legal questions: first, whether jurors may reconstruct an expert witness’s experiment on an allegedly defective product; and second, whether a personal-injury plaintiff, must present expert testimony regarding future pain and suffering in order for the jury to award damages for the plaintiffs broken leg. We conclude that jurors may, using admitted evidence, reenact an experiment as performed by an expert. We further conclude that a broken bone is a sufficiently objective injury for a jury to award future pain and suffering damages…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cases cited29 opinions

  1. Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1993
  2. Tennessee v. StreetSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  3. Bolden v. StateNevada Supreme Court · 1981
  4. Dow Chemical Co. v. MahlumNevada Supreme Court · 1998
  5. Daly v. StateNevada Supreme Court · 1983

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

3Cited by44 opinions

  1. State v. Eighth Judicial District Court ex rel. County of ClarkNevada Supreme Court · 2011
  2. Christian v. GraySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 2003
  3. Bongiovi v. SullivanNevada Supreme Court · 2006
  4. Olson v. RichardNevada Supreme Court · 2004
  5. Johnson v. StateNevada Supreme Court · 2002

39 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