Ma'ele v. Arrington
Court of Appeals of Washington
1Opinion of the CourtArmstrong, C.J.
The trial court found Florine Arrington solely at fault for a car accident she had with Duke Ma’ele. Several chiropractic doctors testified that the accident injured Ma’ele. But a biomechanical engineer said that he would not expect a person to be injured in such a low-energy collision. The jury found that the accident did not proximately cause Ma’ele’s injuries and awarded no damages. On appeal, Ma’ele argues that the evidence does not support the verdict; he also contends the court erred in allowing the engineer to testify because (1) he was not qualified *560to testify about injuries, and (2)…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Frye v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1923
- Washington State Physicians Insurance Exchange & Ass'n v. Fisons Corp.Washington Supreme Court · 1993
- Burnside v. Simpson Paper Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1994
- Brown v. Spokane County Fire Protection District No. 1Washington Supreme Court · 1983
- Palmer v. JensenWashington Supreme Court · 1997
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Berryman v. MetcalfCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2013
- Johnston-Forbes v. MatsunagaWashington Supreme Court · 2014
- Stedman v. CooperCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2012
- Wilson v. RiversSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2004
- L.M. by and Through Dussault v. HamiltonWashington Supreme Court · 2019
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.