A notable medical malpractice decision was recently handed
down by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.
In the case of Mitchell v. Shikora, No. 55 WAP 2017
(Pa. June 18, 2019) (majority Op. by Todd J.) (Wecht, J., concurring) (Donohue,
J., concurring and dissenting), the court ruled that evidence of risk and
complications of surgery may be admissible in a medical negligence trial since
such evidence is relevant and admissible regarding the proper standard of care
and whether there was a breach of that standard of care.
This matter arose out of a medical malpractice action in
which the Plaintiff alleged negligence on the part of a surgeon during the
course of a laparoscopic hysterectomy.
Prior to trial, the Plaintiff filed a Motion In Limine to
exclude evidence of her informed consent about the risks and complications of
the surgery, which included the very situation that arose during the course of
the surgery in this matter. The court
denied the motion with respect to the very situation that was at issue in this
case.
At trial, the Defendants presented testimony that the event
that occurred during the course of the surgery was a recognized risk or
complication of the overall surgery.
The jury returned a defense verdict.
On appeal, the Superior Court had reversed and remanded the
case for a new trial under a rationale that, in a malpractice action only
alleging negligence and not lack of informed consent, evidence that a patient
consented to an operation despite the advised risks was irrelevant and
inadmissible. The Superior Court had also
found that the admission of this evidence was prejudicial.
As noted, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled otherwise and
held that evidence of risk and complications of surgery was indeed admissible
in a medical negligence claim to establish the applicable standard of care and
to show that the physician’s conduct complied with that standard. As such, the defense verdict was reinstated.
The Majority Opinion of the Supreme Court can be viewed HERE.
Justice Wecht's Concurring Opinion can be viewed HERE.
Justice Donohue's Concurring and Dissenting Opinion can be viewed HERE.
Source: “Court Summaries” By Timothy L. Clawges in
the Pennsylvania Bar News (July 15, 2019).
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.