Legal Opinion

Gutierrez v. Iulo

New York Supreme Court

Decided October 2, 1992PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

Kristin Booth Glen, J.

This in limine motion raises a question of first impression concerning the admissibility of expert testimony on rape trauma syndrome (RTS) in a civil action to recover for personal injury.1 Plaintiff here claims to have been the victim of a sexual assault by defendant Soto, an employee of defendant lulo. Shortly prior to trial, plaintiff’s attorney notified defendants’ counsel that he intended to call an expert witness to testify about RTS. Defendants moved to preclude such testimony pursuant to the medical exchange rule, Uniform Rules for Trial…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. In re Nicole V.New York Court of Appeals · 1987
  2. De Long v. County of ErieNew York Court of Appeals · 1983
  3. Matott v. WardNew York Court of Appeals · 1979
  4. People v. TaylorNew York Court of Appeals · 1990
  5. People v. BledsoeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1984

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Carlton v. Vancouver Care, LLCCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2010
  2. Carlton v. VANCOUVER CARE LLCCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2010

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

Powered by the Exa API