Court Opinion

ID: 9595196
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 00:36:58.90975+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:01:26.591058
License: Public Domain

Per Curiam
(on motion for rehearing). On her motion
for rehearing plaintiff’s counsel contend that the following should be deleted from the opinion:
“When plaintiff’s attorney sought to have a physician, who was entitled to practice medicine and testify in Illinois courts but was not qualified to testify on trials in Wisconsin courts, the court properly ruled that he could not testify in this state.”
*497aThey express the fear that upon retrial the court will construe the language as a mandate to reject any offer of the testimony of an out-of-state physician. That was not intended. The question is left open for determination by the trial court upon the circumstances then appearing.
Motions for rehearing denied without costs.