Beahm v. Shortall

Decided 1977-02-07

Cited by 103 later decision(s) in our corpus · see the citation network in Lexace

Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case

From the opinion

Orth, J., delivered the opinion of the Court. This appeal requires that we look again at the rule followed in this jurisdiction concerning the admissibility of the testimony of a physician employed to examine a person, not for the purpose of treatment, but in order to qualify as an expert witness during litigati…

Read the full opinion (source) ↗


Lexace provides legal information, not legal advice, and no attorney–client relationship is created. Citation figures are counts of later citing opinions in our corpus and may be incomplete; always read and Shepardize the full opinion before relying on it.