court did not have a unique opportunity to assess the credibility of the doctors. 6 . The trial court found that "Dr. Ouzounian's opinion that Catherine Ford's brachial plexus injury was caused by intrauterine contractions [was] not scientifically reliable." Thus, he could not testify to that opinion. The trial court did not "preclude evidence about whether brachial plexus injuries can happen in the absence of excessive clinically applied traction. Drs. Cooper and Ouzounian [weJre precluded only from testifying that in their opinion this injury to Catherine Ford was caused by intrauterine contractions unrelated to her shoulder dystocia." 7 . See Clark ex rel. Clark v. Heidrick, 150 F.3d 912, 915 (8th Cir.1998) (the intrauterine 791 at 164 (Ohio Ct.App. Mar. 31, 2008) {unpublished) (<HOLDING>); Taber v. Roush, 316 S.W.3d 139 (Tex.App.2010)
holding that defensive theory must be submitted to jury when theory is raised by evidence from any source holding that the pretrial order did not adequately disclose a theory because it did not give notice of that theory holding that the theory of intrauterine forces as a likely causation theory was properly admitted holding that the jury need not agree on the theory supporting the conviction if there is sufficient evidence to support either theory holding summary judgment appropriate when the facts in evidence supported another plausible theory not the plaintiffs theory of the case