Campbell University

Campbell University Law School
Not a member yet
    1412 research outputs found

    Closing Remarks

    No full text

    The Evolving Role of the Corporate Counsel: How Information Technology is Reinventing Legal Practice

    Get PDF

    Closing Remarks

    No full text

    North Carolina\u27s Wary Reception of Drug Treatment Court: The Myth of Inherent Ethics Violations Within Its Structure

    Get PDF

    The Sky Didn’t Fall: The Meaning and Legal Effects of the North Carolina Marriage Amendment

    Get PDF

    Blessed Are the Peacemakers

    Get PDF

    Annual Report of the Dean

    Get PDF

    Evidence - Admissibility of Expert Opinion

    Get PDF
    The North Carolina Supreme Court made significant progress toward resolving the uncertainty in the law on the admissibility of medical expert opinion evidence in State v. Wade. Since State v. David, the rule in North Carolina was that an expert must base his opinion testimony on either (1) personal knowledge or observation or (2) a hypothetical question addressed to him, in which the pertinent facts are assumed to be true, or rather, assumed to be so found by the jury. After David several cases were decided which liberalized the rule considerably while others held fast to David. Without having overruled or reconciled any of these cases, the Court appeared to have a convenient precedent for the next decision, whatever its tenor may be. The next decision, which fell in line with and clarified the line of cases which more liberally allowed admission of expert opinion evidence, was Wade. The Court held that a medical expert may testify to the information on which he based his opinion, even though obtained from the patient himself, provided the information is inherently reliable

    Workers\u27 Compensation - You Take (45% of) My Breath Away

    Get PDF
    This comment will examine the standards the North Carolina appellate courts have developed to determine whether a workers\u27 compensation claimant is entitled to relief for an occupational disease under subsection thirteen, as well as the rules governing apportionment of liability in claims arising under the Act. Finally, the Morrison decision will be considered in light of previous decisional law and standards adopted in the majority of jurisdictions

    1,162

    full texts

    1,412

    metadata records
    Updated in last 30 days.
    Campbell University Law School
    Access Repository Dashboard
    Do you manage Open Research Online? Become a CORE Member to access insider analytics, issue reports and manage access to outputs from your repository in the CORE Repository Dashboard! 👇