In his recent decision in the case of Bernheisel v. Mikaya, No. 3:13-cv-01496 (M.D. Pa. Aug. 9, 2016
Mariani, J.), Judge Robert D. Mariani addressed a number of Pre-Trial Motions
in Limine filed by Defendants in this medical malpractice action including a request for a bifurcation of trial
and motions seeking to preclude and limit medical expense and future economic
damages claims.
The Opinion is notable with respect to Judge Mariani’s
recitation and application of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 42(b) pertaining
to motions to bifurcate trials. Here,
the Defendants requested a bifurcation of the liability issues from the damages
issues. Using his broad discretion on
the matter, Judge Mariani denied this motion.
With regards to the Motions pertaining to the economic
damages claims, Judge Mariani ruled, in part, that he would defer ruling on
the Defendant’s Motions relative to the Plaintiff’s medical cost claims until
the time of trial. The Court did
generally note that Pennsylvania law requires the Plaintiff to produce evidence
which establishes this type of claim with reasonable certainty and does not
require the Plaintiff to establish a precise amount of damages.
The Defendants also sought the permission of the court to
cross-examine the Plaintiff’s life care planning experts on the future medical
expenses claims by crossing the expert and introducing evidence pertaining to
Medicaid, Medicare, and the Affordance Care Act.
Judge Mariani, citing, in part, to the case of Deeds v. University of Pennsylvania Medical
Center, noted that the collateral source rule precludes counsel from
pursuing certain inquiries, including raising an individual’s access to
Medicare, Medicaid, and benefits under the Affordance Care Act when opposing a
future medical expenses claim.
As such, the court in Bernheisel precluded the defense from
cross-examining the Plaintiff’s life care planning expert on these issues.
Anyone desiring a copy of this decision may click this LINK.
To review the February 9, 2015 Tort Talk post on the Deeds v. University of Pennsylvania Medical Center case, which contains a Link to that decision, click HERE.
The prevailing Plaintiff’s attorney in this matter was
Attorney Max Kennerly, Esquire of the Philadelphia law firm of Kennerly Loutey, LLC. I send
thanks to Attorney Michael A. O’Donnell
of the Kingston, Pennsylvania O’Donnell Law Offices for bringing this decision
to my attention.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.