Counsel for the defendant objected to the admissibility of this testimony, as having no probative value, since the similarity of the conditions upon which the plaintiff’s experience was founded to those which existed on the morning in question had not been sufficiently established. I think, however, that the plaintiff was entitled to put it before the jury for what it was worth: Vide Piggott v. Eastern Counties Ry. Co. (1846) 3 C.B. 229, 136 E.R. 92.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.