Legal Opinion

Primavera v. Celotex Corp.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided May 7, 1992No. 01777PublishedCited by 68 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BECK, Judge:

The primary issue in this case is the extent to which an expert witness may rely on information generated by other professionals who are not subject to cross examination.

In this suit for recovery for asbestos related harm defendant objects to the admission of certain expert testimony in which the expert relied on data from reports which, although admitted into evidence, were generated by professionals who were not subject to cross-examination. We find the trial court did not err in admitting this testimony.

Appellee Richard Primavera instituted an action for personal injuries…

2Cases cited25 opinions

  1. Bolus v. United Penn BankSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
  2. Commonwealth v. ThomasSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1971
  3. United States v. James W. WilliamsCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1971
  4. Brannan v. Lankenau HospitalSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1980
  5. Mudano v. Phila. Rapid Transit Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1927

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

3Cited by68 opinions

  1. McManamon v. WashkoSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2006
  2. Yacoub v. Lehigh Valley Medical Associates, P.C.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2002
  3. Gunn v. GrossmanSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2000
  4. Collins v. CooperSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2000
  5. Commonwealth v. duPontSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1999

63 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