 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
HOBBIEBRUNKEN v. G & S ENTERPRISES5/15/1991
ausen did not fall within the categories of persons whose names were requested by the interrogatories. Furthermore, when Barlas testified as to Clausen's presence in the Waterfront that night, plaintiff failed to object or request a continuance so she could depose or subpoena Clausen. Instead, she waited until the jury returned with a defendant's verdict and then raised the issue for the first time in her motion for new trial. By so doing, plaintiff waived her right to complain about the omission. The court correctly denied plaintiff's motion for new trial.
AFFIRMED.
|