In what circumstances will the court allow the admission of evidence in a medical malpractice case?

in the admission of evidence unless it is called upon to rule on an objection by a party. [Citation.] The court may of course exclude evidence on its own motion, but it will ordinarily do so only if it finds the evidence wasteful of judicial resources because, e.g., it is redundant or irrelevant. [Citations.] If proffered evidence is relevant, courts will rarely if ever exclude it sua sponte merely because it may fall within some exclusionary rule." (People v. Viray (2005) 134 Cal.App.4th 1186, 1208.)

Defendant points to People v. King (1968) 266 Cal.App.2d 437, 444, which states: "'Before a witness advanced as an expert is permitted to give his opinion, his qualifications must be passed on by the court. The party who produces the expert first examines him on his qualifications. Then the opposing party has the right to conduct a voir dire examination on his qualifications. After this the trial judge determines whether the witness is an expert and can testify...."