The caption
The parties exactly as the court lists them—not a claim about the merits.
State court of last resort · ST-VA-SC
Breeden v. Roberts
No. 982556Supreme Court of Virginia
982556 Breeden v. Roberts 09/17/1999 In a traffic accident case, expert opinion testimony excluded by the trial judge was relevant because it tended to support the defendant's contention about why he lost cont…
Clerk language is kept verbatim. Vote Files does not infer who is winning.The movement
Orders, motions, and filings in the clerk's own words and sequence.
The proof
The official docket and available court documents attached to every update.
982556 Breeden v. Roberts 09/17/1999 In a traffic accident case, expert opinion testimony excluded by the trial judge was relevan…
- Court
- Supreme Court of Virginia
- First seen
- Oct 4, 2026
- Last entry
- Sep 17, 1999
No bill or executive-order citation is attached to this file.
Official docket
Case timeline
The clerk's wording is shown verbatim and linked to the court's own document page where available.
Docket entry
982556 Breeden v. Roberts 09/17/1999 In a traffic accident case, expert opinion testimony excluded by the trial judge was relevant because it tended to support the defendant's contention about why he lost control of his truck. The proffered testimony was based upon the knowledge and experience of a qualified mechanic and was not speculative. It related to a matter beyond the ordinary experience of a jury. Therefore, the trial court erred in excluding the testimony and the case is reversed and remanded.
Open court document ↗Documents and links