Non-expert testimony sufficient to support medical causation because the testimony established, “…a sequence of events which provides a strong, logically traceable connection between the [collision] and the condition.”
Morgan v. Compugraphic Corp. , 674 S.W. 2d 729 (Tex. 1984).
General human experience and common sense to establish medical causation.
Aggressive litigants often use discovery disputes to slow
proceedings, attack the credibility of witnesses, and confuse the issues in a case.
Failure to comply with discovery requests can lead to adverse rulings. AND …
Failure by a witness to keep documents that may be discoverable can result in sanctions. Trevino, M.D. v. Ortega, 969 S.W.2d 950 (Tex. 1998).
Evidence spoliation is not a new concept. For years courts have struggled with the problem and devised possible solutions. Probably the earliest and most enduring solution was the spoliation inference or omnia praesumuntur contra spoliatorem :……
… All things are presumed against a wrongdoer .
Use of Learned Treatises TRE 803 Hearsay Exception
Learned Treatises . To the extent called to the attention of an expert witness upon cross-examination or relied upon by the expert in direct examination , statements contained in published treatises, periodicals, or pamphlets on a subject of history, medicine, or other science or art established as a reliable authority by the testimony or admission of the witness or by other expert testimony or by judicial notice. If admitted, the statements may be read into evidence but may not be received as exhibits .
“ Unfortunately , almost none of the relevant epidemiological studies appear in the trial court record, though several were marked for identification and discussed at length during the trial. As learned treatises, excerpts from these studies could be read to jurors, but none were admitted as exhibits for jurors' independent review . But while the rules of evidence withhold learned treatises from jurors, that does not mean they should be withheld entirely from the record.”
State Office of Risk Mgmt. v. Larkins , 258 S.W.3d 686 , Tex.App. Waco 2008
“… the wisdom of the rules of evidence does not allow documents in place of expert testimony because the rules bar the admission of "learned treatises" in place of expert testimony. Id.; TEX. R. EVID. 803(18) (providing statement from learned document may be read into evidence--though not received as an exhibit--if an expert is present to [**12] verify its reliability and explain what it means).