81 results for 'cat:"Experts" AND cat:"Medical Malpractice"'.
J. Molaison finds that the trial court should not have denied an animal hospital's motion for summary judgment on a dog owner's claim that the dog was misdiagnosed. In this case, the dog owner's expert did not meet the statutory criteria because she did not graduate from an accredited school of veterinary medicine, was not licensed to practice veterinary medicine, and was not practicing veterinary medicine. Reversed.
Court: Louisiana Court Of Appeal, Judge: Molaison , Filed On: January 31, 2024, Case #: 23-C-510, Categories: Negligence, experts, medical Malpractice
J. Bourliot finds that the trial court properly denied the healthcare parties' motion to dismiss a patient's medical malpractice suit over an alleged unnecessary surgery by a podiatrist to address her bunion. The patient's amended expert report was sufficient to meet statutory requirements as to applicable standards of care, the doctor's alleged breaches and the cause of the patient's injuries. Affirmed.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Bourliot, Filed On: January 25, 2024, Case #: 14-22-00874-CV, Categories: Negligence, experts, medical Malpractice
J. Readler finds the lower court properly granted the nursing home's motion for summary judgment because the estate's failure to obtain a medical expert witness with familiarity of the standard of care required for patients in Memphis precluded the medical malpractice action. Tennessee law requires an expert witness with knowledge of local standards of care for individuals who pursue medical malpractice actions, and the estate's witness admitted he was familiar only with a national standard, which was insufficient to allow the action to proceed. Affirmed.
Court: 6th Circuit, Judge: Readler, Filed On: January 22, 2024, Case #: 23-5527, Categories: experts, Wrongful Death, medical Malpractice
J. England partially grants the United States’ motion to exclude a patient’s two expert witnesses in this medical malpractice lawsuit. The patient alleges he had a stroke after doctors failed to administer antibiotics testing positive for enterococcus faecalis before discharging her. One of the experts, a long-time professor, does not meet the requirements because the testimony fails to demonstrate that he has performed basic emergency medicine. The other expert internist and hospitalist has served at several facilities, making him acknowledgeable as an expert; he agrees the standard of care was breached when the patient was sent home instead of being admitted. So the motion to exclude the professor expert is granted and the internist and hospitalist expert is denied. Summary judgment is denied at this stage.
Court: USDC Northern District of Alabama , Judge: England, Filed On: January 12, 2024, Case #: 2:21cv576, NOS: Personal Injury - Medical Malpractice - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: experts, medical Malpractice
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Egan finds that the lower court properly declined to entirely dismiss medical malpractice claims concerning treatment of a fractured wrist. Expert opinion indicated the treating physicians failed to recognize from x-rays that the fracture was healing out of alignment and failed to recommend she take a large dose of Vitamin C daily following surgery to avoid complex regional pain syndrome. Affirmed.
Court: New York Appellate Divisions, Judge: Egan, Filed On: January 11, 2024, Case #: 535997, Categories: experts, medical Malpractice
J. Mansfield finds that a doctor was improperly denied summary judgment in medical malpractice claims concerning injuries resulting from breast reduction surgery because the expert who signed the patient's certificate of merit was retired and lacked an active license to practice medicine as required under Iowa Code 147.139(1). Reversed.
Court: Iowa Supreme Court, Judge: Mansfield, Filed On: December 22, 2023, Case #: 22-1572, Categories: experts, medical Malpractice
Per curiam, the Iowa Supreme Court finds that a doctor was improperly denied summary judgment in medical malpractice claims concerning injuries resulting from breast reduction surgery because the expert who signed the patient's certificate of merit was retired and did not have an active license to practice medicine, as required under Iowa Code 147.139(1). Reversed.
Court: Iowa Supreme Court, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: December 22, 2023, Case #: 22-1927, Categories: experts, medical Malpractice
J. Hyman finds for the hospital in a medical malpractice suit because the patient failed to call an expert witness to establish the hospital had deviated from the standard of care when it punctured her left atrium while performing heart surgery. The deposition testimony of the two doctors involved in her surgery does not enunciate a standard of care. Affirmed.
Court: Illinois Appellate Court, Judge: Hyman, Filed On: December 22, 2023, Case #: 230078, Categories: experts, medical Malpractice
J. Scales finds the trial court properly entered summary judgment in favor of the university and doctors in the patient's medical malpractice lawsuit alleging negligence that caused her to suffer a stroke. The trial court did not abuse its discretion by striking the patient's causation expert as unreliable and lacking the requisite foundation, in part because the expert admitted he did not review the patient's medical records or ask her about her medical history of severe hypertension, which at least partially caused the stroke. The remainder of the patient's arguments are dismissed without discussion. Affirmed.
Court: Florida Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Scales, Filed On: December 13, 2023, Case #: 22-1055, Categories: experts, medical Malpractice
Per curiam, the court of appeal finds that the trial court properly dismissed consolidated medical malpractice claims in which a patient sued medical providers, the state of Florida, and his own expert witness for refusing to provide an opinion because the patient failed to comply with filing requirements and the claims are time-barred. Affirmed.
Court: Florida Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: November 29, 2023, Case #: 1D2023-0358, Categories: Civil Procedure, experts, medical Malpractice
J. Johnson denies the healthcare providers' motion to exclude expert testimony, ruling the estate's witness has worked closely with correctional facility nurses throughout his career and is well-acquainted with protocols at such facilities; therefore, he is qualified and his testimony will be highly relevant to the outcome of the case. Meanwhile, the estate's motion to limit the providers' expert testimony in granted in regard to potential hearsay about the victim's prior methamphetamine use because such statements would be outside the scope of the physician's area of expertise.
Court: USDC New Mexico, Judge: Johnson, Filed On: November 21, 2023, Case #: 1:22cv288, NOS: Personal Injury - Medical Malpractice - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: experts, medical Malpractice
J. Kunselman finds that the lower court properly entered judgment in favor of an eye doctor in this personal injury suit alleging he blinded a patient’s right eye by improperly injecting fluid into it. The patient failed to establish that the court abused its discretion by barring one of her experts from testifying at the jury trial. Affirmed.
Court: Pennsylvania Superior Court, Judge: Kunselman, Filed On: November 9, 2023, Case #: J-A18034-23, Categories: Tort, experts, medical Malpractice
J. Land finds that the trial court improperly ruled in favor of the hospital and doctors in the mother's medical malpractice action alleging that she was not informed of the dangers of co-sleeping with her newborn son. The son suffered a serious brain injury and permanent disability due to co-sleeping. The trial court applied in an incorrect standard in finding that testimony from the mother's experts was purely speculative. The experts testified that they believed that the son's injuries were caused by co-sleeping and also testified regarding the methodological basis for their conclusions. The experts' methodology was sufficient under the law. Reversed.
Court: Georgia Court of Appeals, Judge: Land, Filed On: October 23, 2023, Case #: A23A1014, Categories: experts, medical Malpractice
J. Boyle finds the trial court properly denied the patient's motion for a new trial on medical malpractice claims. The testimony provided by the nurse anesthetist's expert witness did not exceed the scope of his qualifications and, even if it did, the patient's counsel invited the error when he cross-examined the witness about the standard of care required for anesthesiologists. Meanwhile, comments made by the nurse's attorney about expert witness fees and the length of the nurse's career during open and closing arguments did not prejudice the jury or constitute misconduct, but merely commented on the credibility of witnesses. Affirmed.
Court: Ohio Court Of Appeals, Judge: Boyle, Filed On: October 12, 2023, Case #: 2023-Ohio-3715, Categories: Evidence, experts, medical Malpractice
J. Beatty rules a group of expert witnesses may partly submit opinions in court concerning a patient who suffered a miscarriage of a fetus with abnormal chromosomes, which could have been discovered in genetic screening of the father, who has four- way translocation. The group of expert witnesses may submit opinions of standard of care, but not theories of independent conception.
Court: USDC Southern District of Illinois, Judge: Beatty , Filed On: September 29, 2023, Case #: 3:20cv10, NOS: Personal Injury - Health Care/Pharmaceutical Personal Injury/Product Liability - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: Health Care, experts, medical Malpractice
J. Delaney finds that while the medical providers do not dispute the injury to the patient's femoral nerve occurred during hip replacement surgery, the trial court properly granted their motion for summary judgment because the inability by the patient's expert witness to pinpoint exactly when or why the injury occurred prevented him from creating a question of fact as to whether the providers' care fell below a reasonable standard of care. Affirmed.
Court: Ohio Court Of Appeals, Judge: Delaney, Filed On: September 25, 2023, Case #: 2023-Ohio-3416, Categories: Evidence, experts, medical Malpractice
J. Baker rules in favor of the Georgia Department of Corrections as to the former inmate's medical malpractice claims against it arising after his infected toe fell off while he was incarcerated. However, the board's motion for partial summary judgment is rejected as to the inmate's claims based on a doctor's alleged negligence. There is a genuine dispute of fact as to whether the doctor was a correctional healthcare employee or an independent contractor. The physician assistant failed to show that she is entitled to qualified immunity from the civil rights claim alleging deliberate indifference. The ex-inmate's motion to exclude portions of the experts' opinions is partially granted as to two doctors' opinions that the prison parties met the standard of care and as to one doctor's opinion that they did not cause the ex-inmate's injuries.
Court: USDC Southern District of Georgia, Judge: Baker, Filed On: September 8, 2023, Case #: 4:21cv277, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: Civil Rights, experts, medical Malpractice
J. Bevan holds that the district court properly found that a client could not prevail in a legal malpractice case that alleged her attorneys had not timely filed an underlying medical malpractice case. The district court used the correct standard to find that the client's medical experts were not qualified to testify about her underlying medical malpractice claims. Without expert testimony supporting the underlying medical malpractice claims, she failed to establish a prima facie medical malpractice case as required for the legal malpractice claim. Affirmed.
Court: Idaho Supreme Court, Judge: Bevan, Filed On: September 6, 2023, Case #: 49300, Categories: experts, medical Malpractice, Legal Malpractice
J. Gobeil finds that the trial court properly granted the clinic's motion to exclude testimony from two of the widow's experts in a medical malpractice and wrongful death action arising from the husband's death due to multi organ failure from severe malaria. The trial court correctly excluded the hospitalist's causation opinions and standard of care opinions, as well as the internal medicine doctor's general causation opinion. The experts' causation opinions were not based on reliable methodology. Affirmed.
Court: Georgia Court of Appeals, Judge: Gobeil, Filed On: September 6, 2023, Case #: A23A0735, Categories: experts, Wrongful Death, medical Malpractice
J. Contreras finds that the lower court improperly dismissed this medical malpractice lawsuit stemming from a patient's complications following heart surgery, when he developed ischemia and thrombocytopenia. The appellant should have been granted an extension as to the expert report. Accordingly, the matter is remanded, so that she can "cure the deficiencies in her initial expert report." Reversed.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Contreras, Filed On: August 30, 2023, Case #: 13-23-00160-CV, Categories: Civil Procedure, experts, medical Malpractice
J. Ellis finds that the lower court improperly found for the dentist in a medical malpractice suit because the patient failed to present expert testimony on the element of proximate cause. Some of the patient's claims require such expert testimony, but others do not.
Court: Illinois Appellate Court, Judge: Ellis, Filed On: August 29, 2023, Case #: 211448, Categories: experts, medical Malpractice
J. Harper finds, based on the Connecticut Supreme Court's ruling in Carpenter v. Daar, the trial court erroneously granted the medical providers' motion to dismiss a medical malpractice claim based on an allegedly insufficient opinion from a similar health care provider. The opinion requirement is not jurisdictional and, therefore, the estate should have been given the opportunity to amend its filings, regardless of the expiration of the statute of limitations. Reversed.
Court: Connecticut Court Of Appeals, Judge: Harper, Filed On: August 11, 2023, Case #: AC44757, Categories: Civil Procedure, experts, medical Malpractice