 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Cenal v. Ragunton12/27/2004
FOR PUBLICATION
Plaintiffs-Appellants Anatalia Cenal (Anatalia) and Michael Cenal (Michael) (collectively, the Cenals) appeal from the Judgment filed on February 3, 2003 in the Circuit Court of the First Circuit (circuit court).
On appeal, the Cenals contend (1) the jury verdict was against the clear weight of the evidence and/or the jury misunderstood its charge; (2) the circuit court erred in not granting the Cenals' Motion for New Trial; (3) the circuit court erred when it did not permit the Cenals to ask prospective jurors if the jurors had any interest or relationship to Defendant-Appellee Luis Ragunton, M.D.'s (Dr. Ragunton) insurance company; and (4) the circuit court erred when it did not allow the Cenals to cross-examine George Druger, M.D. (Dr. Druger), Dr. Ragunton's witness, about his prior financial relationships with Dr. Ragunton's insurance company. We affirm.
I.
In January 1987, Anatalia was referred to Dr. Ragunton for treatment of hypertension by George Chu, M.D. (Dr. Chu). At the time, both Dr. Chu and Dr. Ragunton were working at Fronk Clinic. Dr. Ragunton diagnosed Anatalia with allergic rhinitis and hypertension. Around 1990-1991, Dr. Ragunton left Fronk Clinic for private practice and took Anatalia with him as a patient for treatment of her hypertension and respiratory problems.
On April 12, 1993, Anatalia came to Dr. Ragunton with a sudden acute exacerbation of her asthma, which he assessed as being from an infection. Dr. Ragunton initially treated her with medications for the infection and systemic steroids. Anatalia came back on April 16, 1993 with complaints of continued symptoms, and Dr. Ragunton added a steroid inhaler. Anatalia got better with Dr. Ragunton's treatment for the infection.
Anatalia saw Dr. Ragunton in February and July 1994; January, March, April, and November 1995; July and November 1996; January and May 1997; April, May, and October 1998; and June 1999 for exacerbations of her asthma. Anatalia was also hospitalized four times for status asthmaticus. Status asthmaticus is a severe, potentially life-threatening asthma attack. While hospitalized, Anatalia received high dose I.V. steroids as treatment.
On July 2, 1998, Anatalia went to Dr. Ragunton with a complaint of severe left hip pain. An x-ray of her left hip showed abnormalities to her femoral head (a ball at the top of the thigh bone that fits into the hip socket). Dr. Ragunton ordered an MRI of the hip because the x-ray was abnormal. The MRI came back positive for avascular necrosis. As a result, Anatalia had her left hip replaced in November 1998.
On December 8, 2000, the Cenals filed a complaint against Dr. Ragunton for negligence and lack of informed consent based on the medical treatment received by Anatalia from Dr. Ragunton and for Michael's loss of consortium. On December 27, 2000, Dr. Ragunton filed an answer denying negligence and lack of informed consent and asserting defenses of failure to state a claim, contributory negligence, assumption of risk, statute of limitations, failure to mitigate damages, lack of proximate and/or legal cause, and the doctrines of estoppel, waiver and laches. Dr. Ragunton also demanded a trial by jury.
On November 27, 2002, prior to trial, Dr. Ragunton filed his "Motion in Limine #5 to Preclude Evidence of and/or Reference to Professional Liability Insurance" (Motion in Limine). Dr. Ragunton argued that evidence of and reference to his professional liability and/or medical malpractice insurance should be excluded pursuant to Hawaii Rules of Evidence (HRE) Rules 411 and 403. Specifically, Dr. Ragunton argued the Cenals should be precluded from asking the jur
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Hawaii Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|