Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Sears v. Rutishauser

Appellate Court of Illinois

Decided September 14, 1983No. 4-82-0743Published

1Concurrence

PRESIDING JUSTICE WEBBER,

concurring in part and dissenting in part:

I agree with my learned colleagues that no error occurred in the treatment of Dr. McMenamin’s testimony; however, I differ seriously with them on the matters concerning the cross-examination of Dr. Rumer and the rebuttal argument of plaintiff’s counsel.

The handling of expert witnesses and their cross-examination may be summed up in the old adage, “Whose bread I eat, his song I sing.” One need only scan the professional journals to observe that experts are for hire in the market place on an almost illimitable number of…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Ager v. Baltimore Transit Co.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1957
  2. Wilson v. StilwillMichigan Supreme Court · 1981
  3. Chicago & Eastern Illinois Railroad v. SchmitzIllinois Supreme Court · 1904
  4. Chicago City Railway Co. v. SmithIllinois Supreme Court · 1907
  5. Lammert v. WellsSupreme Court of Missouri · 1929

1 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