| This decision brings for both plaintiff and defense | | | | than assertions distributed at trial and the entire |
| lawyers with dual justices going in near counter | | | | monetary figures charged for prior medical services |
| directions in regard to their directing action, reasoning, | | | | performed can be admitted to a jury at the court |
| and analysis of Hanif/Nishihama. | | | | action. |
| Nonetheless, according to San Francisco Personal | | | | Hence, albeit Olsen in no way clarify the question |
| Injury Attorney Brett Burlison, plaintiff's attorneys should | | | | refering to the the accepted version of the normal |
| be heartened by one minimal but unique, bit that can be | | | | value of doctor and hospital services, it is clear that the |
| gleaned from both concurrences in Olsen v. Reid: | | | | conclusion as to what the reasonable value of medical |
| neither dueling justice (Justice Fybel and Justice Moore) | | | | services, at trial, is still within the power of the jury. |
| on hand, disagree, or even imply that information other | | | | |