Ruling on Admissibility of Evidence Reviewed Under Abuse of Discretion
The trial court allowed certain testimony / evidence to be introduced at trial. I objected, but the trial court overruled my objection. That evidence was introduced and I lost the trial. I am considering an appeal based on the trial court’s admissibility of this evidence.
“Rulings on the admission of evidence are reviewed [on appeal] under the abuse of discretion standard [of review].” Cantore ex rel. Cantore v. West Boca Medical Center, Inc., 2015 WL 5603449 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015). This discretion, however, is limited by the Florida Rules of Evidence. Johnston v. State, 863 So.2d 271, 278 (Fla. 2003).
For example, in Cantore, a medical malpractice action, a pediatric neurosurgeon that treated a minor answered hypothetical questions. The jury returned a verdict in favor of the defendant hospital and the plaintiff appealed. The plaintiff’s lawyer argued that the the trial court should not have admitted the testimony of the treating doctor in answering hypothetical questions. The appellate court, in the context of the medical malpractice action, found that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting this testimony.
Please contact David Adelstein at email@example.com or (954) 361-4720 if you have questions or would like more information regarding this article. You can follow David Adelstein on Twitter @DavidAdelstein1.