From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

City of Topeka v. Lauck

Court of Appeals of Kansas.
Sep 22, 2017
401 P.3d 1064 (Kan. Ct. App. 2017)

Summary

applying federal Daubert standards and concluding that Parcells's work in forensic pathology did not qualify him to testify that a defendant's asthma artificially inflated the results of a breathalyzer test, which required specialized expertise

Summary of this case from Wurm v. Ford Motor Co.

Opinion

No. 116,316

09-22-2017

CITY OF TOPEKA, Appellee, v. Nyla S. LAUCK, Appellant.

Eric Kjorlie, of Topeka, for appellant. Charles F. Kitt, chief of prosecution, and Seth Brackman, assistant city attorney, for appellee.


Affirmed.


Summaries of

City of Topeka v. Lauck

Court of Appeals of Kansas.
Sep 22, 2017
401 P.3d 1064 (Kan. Ct. App. 2017)

applying federal Daubert standards and concluding that Parcells's work in forensic pathology did not qualify him to testify that a defendant's asthma artificially inflated the results of a breathalyzer test, which required specialized expertise

Summary of this case from Wurm v. Ford Motor Co.
Case details for

City of Topeka v. Lauck

Case Details

Full title:CITY OF TOPEKA, Appellee, v. Nyla S. LAUCK, Appellant.

Court:Court of Appeals of Kansas.

Date published: Sep 22, 2017

Citations

401 P.3d 1064 (Kan. Ct. App. 2017)

Citing Cases

Wurm v. Ford Motor Co.

The Court notes that other courts have likewise rejected Parcells's attempt to testify in a specialized field…