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

Yates (P) was injured in the course of his employment, and filed a Workers' Compensation claim for the same injuries at issue in this suit. In addition to being examined by his own physicians, Fleck and Lewis, P was examined by physicians on behalf of his employer's Workers' Compensation insurers: Drs. Guthrie and Younas examined P on behalf of Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, and Dr. Richman on behalf of Interboro Mutual Indemnity Insurance Co. These doctors' reports were submitted to the insurance companies and the state Workmens' Compensation Board. P wishes to introduce the reports without the testimony of the doctors and has requested a ruling regarding their admissibility. Although there is no question that the reports were prepared in the regular course of the doctors' business, D argues that because they were prepared in anticipation of litigation, they lack the trustworthiness which justifies the business records exception, and should not be admitted. The parties in this lawsuit requested a ruling on the admissibility of a police blotter report concerning an accident and medical reports from various doctors who examined P in connection with a prior Workman's Compensation claim arising from the accident.

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.