In Diver, the plaintiff had produced an expert of his own who did testify as to the claimed elements of malpractice; and there the reversal of McDermott was not deemed sufficient to require submission to the Court of Appeals of the claim that the exclusion of the defendant physician's expert proof constituted reviewable error.
Summary of this case from Forman v. AzzaraDecided June 29, 1964
JUDGMENT AFFIRMED
In Diver, the plaintiff had produced an expert of his own who did testify as to the claimed elements of malpractice; and there the reversal of McDermott was not deemed sufficient to require submission to the Court of Appeals of the claim that the exclusion of the defendant physician's expert proof constituted reviewable error.
Summary of this case from Forman v. AzzaraFull title:DIVER v. JEWISH HOSP. OF BROOKLYN
Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Date published: Jun 29, 1964
So viewed, there was no issue as to the necessity for a biopsy; the exclusion of defendant's testimony that a…