Court Opinion

ID: 9638775
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 15:53:35.23872+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:10:09.515661
License: Public Domain

Skoglund, J.,
concurring. I concur in the result reached by the majority but cannot join in the opinion. I cannot see how the timing and consequences of defendant’s cancer treatment is relevant in this negligence action, nor can I fathom how this evidence is relevant to the determination of whether the accident was the proximate cause of plaintiff’s claim of injury. I would conclude, however, that, in the context of the entire trial, the admission of this evidence was harmless error, given the serious credibility problems in plaintiff’s case, particularly on the issue of proximate cause. Plaintiff’s case further disintegrated when his expert’s testimony was seriously undermined on cross-examination.