What is the technical jargon and scientific jargon used by a plaintiff in a medical malpractice action?

At issue here, however, is not only the technical and scientific jargon, but the various conflicting expert reports respecting what occurred, what may have occurred and what is theorized to have occurred. As was stated by Justice Jones in Hearn v. Bear et al., supra. at p. 64, "[t]he judge must exercise his discretion in each case, bearing in mind the plaintiff's right to a jury trial and the nature of the action."

Simply because a case is one of medical malpractice is not a basis to strike a jury notice. As noted by Justice Rogers in Myra v. Langille, supra., not all medical malpractice trials involve the degree of complexity that a properly instructed jury could not deal with.