As the party claiming error, the burden is on plaintiff to demonstrate prejudice. This misuse of evidence, she asserts, prejudiced her and warrants reversal. In determining credibility which is so very important, there are certain things to look at, certain things to read, read the silent witnesses. I ask that you listen to what they say when you make your deliberations. Such argument improperly urged the jury to use the opinions and conclusions in the reports substantively to test the credibility of plaintiff and the testifying doctors, to the clear prejudice of plaintiff.
Defendants also contend that plaintiff was required to request a limiting instruction.
Here, how- ever, the opinions contained in the reports were not admissible in the first place. A limiting instruction, while appropriate for properly admitted basis evidence, can only draw attention to improperly admitted evidence and will not cure the error. Reporter's Notes, V.R.E. 106. The improper use of the Kuhlmann and Fabricius statements in this case cannot be justified on the ground that they help explain those doctors' original reports. Reversed and remanded.