TORTS — negligence — motor vehicles — determination of contested facts — whether plaintiff fell from his bicycle due to a collision from behind with an alleged unidentified motor vehicle or whether he simply fell from his bicycle — whether plaintiff has established negligence on the part of the driver of an unidentified motor vehicle — whether the defendant has established contributory negligence on the part of the plaintiff — evaluation of conflicting expert accident reconstruction evidence — whether expert opinions supported by found facts; PRACTICE & PROCEDURE — application by defendant to call additional expert evidence — exercise of discretion according to the dictates of justice — whether leave should be granted to enable defendant to call additional evidence from its crash reconstruction expert where a report sought to be relied upon from that expert was prepared in draft form during the trial and had not been served 28 days prior to the hearing as required by UCPR r 31.28 — whether defendant was entitled to leave to call oral evidence in chief from its crash reconstruction expert where that expert was not required for cross-examination on content of his already served reports — application of UCPR r 31.21
