Tort Law

Brien Roche Law > Tort Law Resources > Tort Case Law > Tort Law Cases – E > Authoritative Text or Journal Cases Summarized

Authoritative Text or Journal Cases Summarized

This page within Virginia Tort Case Law is a compilation of cases reported by the Virginia Supreme Court and summarized by Brien Roche dealing with the topic of Authoritative Text or Journal and the related topic of medical malpractice  For more information about medical malpractice see the pages on Wikipedia.

Authoritative Text or Journal-Statutes

Va. Code § 8.01-401.1

Authoritative Text or Journal-Cases

2014 Harman v. Honeywell International, Inc., 288 Va. 84, 758 S.E.2d 515.
Accident investigation report was improperly admitted into evidence as learned treatise under Va. Code § 8.01-401.1. It should not have been designated as such and was therefore not admissible.

2008 Bostic v. About Women OB/GYN, PC. 275 Va. 567, 659 S.E.2d 290.
Authoritative text or journal.In this medical malpractice action Defendants offered into evidence professional text and treatises. For them to be properly admitted the testifying witness must have relied upon the statements contained in the treatises and secondly statements must be established as reliable authority by testimony or by stipulation. These two conditions were not met. In this case these texts were improperly admitted without that foundation being laid.

2007 Budd v. Punyanitya, 273 Va. 583, 643 S.E.2d 180.
Authoritative text or journal.When a party intends to introduce into evidence statements from published literature during the cross-examination of an opposing expert, but wishes to avoid the possibility that the opposing expert will not acknowledge that literature as reliable authority and intends to establish the literature as reliable authority through its own expert, then it must provide opposing counsel with copies of the statements in the literature 30 days before trial pursuant to Va. Code § 8.01-401.1

2002 May v. Caruso, 264 Va. 358, 568 S.E.2d 690.
Authoritative text or journal.Plaintiff sought to admit evidence of authoritative medical text by identifying 51 pages of such text pursuant to Va. Code § 8.01-401.1. Merely providing these pages is not sufficient as the plaintiff did not identify the statements within the text that were to be relied upon and as such, they were not properly admissible.

1996 Weinberg v. Given, 252 Va. 221, 476 S.E.2d 502.
Medical malpractice action. Hearsay content of scientific journals may be read into record as substantive evidence provided no other evidentiary rule prohibits such admission under terms of Va. Code § 8.01-401.1.

1994 Griffett v. Ryan, 247 Va. 465, 443 S.E.2d 149.
In this medical malpractice action doctor did not recognize article in question as being standard and authoritative in field, and as such cross-examination on that article should not have been allowed. Error in this instance was harmless since that doctor admitted the same findings as described in publication.

1991 Todd v. Williams, 242 Va. 178, 409 S.E.2d 450.
It is proper to cross-examine expert witness to test his knowledge and accuracy by reading excerpts from scientific articles that the expert recognizes as standard and authoritative in his field. It is reversible error to introduce content of such articles into evidence so as to present to jury opinions of author.

1956 Hopkins v. Gromovsky, 198 Va. 389, 94 S.E.2d 190.
Medical books or treatises even though properly identified and authenticated and shown to be recognized as standard authorities are not admissible as evidence to prove truth of statements therein. On cross-examination it is proper to test knowledge and accuracy of witness by reading to him pertinent extracts from text and asking him whether he agrees or disagrees with it.

Contact Us For A Free Consultation

Authoritative Text or Journal Cases Summarized

Contact Us For A Free Consultation

    Contact Us For A Free Consultation