This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

P sued D alleging that D served her food which made P sick. During the trial, D was testifying about a phone call where she questioned the doctor at the hospital that P was at and stated, “Well, he said that from the tests they had done that there was no reason to believe that her problem had anything to do with the food.” P objected and the court stated, “I will let it stand. Could have been objected to before the question was answered.” P now argues it was error to allow the answer. D prevailed and P appealed. P argues that the court erred in ruling that her counsel should have objected to the question rather than to the answer because the question does not strictly call for a hearsay response.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.