“manner, conditions and scope” of the examination; and (4) compliance with the request would have inconvenienced plaintiff, who would have had to travel two and one-half hours each way for the examination. After considering defendant Legion’s motion and arguments of counsel, the trial court found “at this late date said independent medical exam is untimely[.]” We conclude the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying defendants’ motion for a medical examination. In their last assignment of error, defendants contend the trial court committed reversible error by allowing plaintiff to elicit testimony on cross-examination from defendant Legion’s representative, Larry Von Eschen (Von Eschen), in violation of defendant Legion’s motion in limine which had been orally g 664 (1998) (<HOLDING>). Since defendants failed to object at trial
holding that failure to object to trial court about violations of federal and state due process waived appellate review of those claims holding that parent waived appellate review of evidentiary ruling by failing to object until posttrial motion holding that a defendant waived a sentencing issue by failing to object in district court holding that employer waived issue on appeal of whether employees testimony was unduly prejudicial by failing to object when testimony was offered at trial holding plaintiffs waived their right to appellate review of the admission of an experts testimony by failing to object to it at trial