Opinion ID: 1865898
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 10

Heading: Testimony of Dr. Johnson.

Text: Next, defendants contend that the trial court abused its discretion in admitting the videotaped testimony of Dr. Johnson because he failed to testify that the impairment rating which he assigned to Stormo's injuries was based upon reasonable medical certainty, from injuries that were a direct result of the accident. Defendants' argument is without merit. Dr. Johnson did testify that Stormo's injuries were sustained in the auto accident, and nowhere do defendants seriously contest this issue. Their argument is based on the failure of Dr. Johnson to recite that his opinion was based upon reasonable medical certainty. There are no magic words needed to express an expert's degree of medical certainty, and the test is only whether the expert's words demonstrate that he or she was expressing an expert medical opinion. Drexler v. All Amer. Life & Cas. Co., 72 Wis.2d 420, 241 N.W.2d 401 (1976). Dr. Johnson's testimony clearly indicates that the impairment rating he assigned to Stormo's injuries was his expert medical opinion. The trial court did not err in admitting his testimony.