Is a plaintiff's failure to object to the testimony of an expert in a medical malpractice case a strike?

to strike, he has forfeited his appellate challenge to the admission of the evidence. (See People v. Partida (2005) 37 Cal.4th 428, 433-435.) Defendant nevertheless contends that the expert's answers were so improper that they amounted to constitutional error, and he further contends that because they amounted to constitutional error, he should be excused from his failure to preserve his challenge to them for review on appeal. On the contrary. As defendant's failure to object to the testimony included a failure to make any claim of constitutional error, he has forfeited any challenge based upon federal constitutional error. (Id. at pp. 435-439.)