[31] Second, there was the fact that Plaintiff’s counsel sought to cross-examine Dr. Rezneck on findings made about his reports in previous cases. I ruled that cross-examining an expert about judicial findings in previous cases where that expert had testified was not within the scope of proper cross-examination. The argument on this ruling, and the consideration of the cases that counsel for the Plaintiff filed consumed a couple of hours of court time. Raising this issue unnecessarily lengthened the trial time, and it should also be considered in a minor way in assessing the costs.
To read more about this assessor see: http://www.fairassociation.ca/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/Reznek-Laurie-Psychiatrist.pdf