 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
[W] Dulaney v. St. Alphonsus Regional Medicial Center8/7/2001
to an emergency room doctor in Boise in August of 1994, where all he did was speak to a fellow neurologist, Dr. Adornato. Dr. Adornato himself was not an emergency room doctor nor was he practicing in Boise in August of - in fact, in any medicine in Boise in August of 1994. With respect to Dr. Waters, I find the same fatal flaw, essentially, Dr. Stump did not adequately familiarize himself with the standard of care applicable to an orthopedic surgeon in Boise in August of 1994, where the only consultation he had was with Dr. Adornato, again a neurologist who is not practicing orthopedic surgery or any other type of medicine in Boise at the relevant time.
Much of what I have said about the admissibility of Dr. Mengert's testimony applies to that of Dr. Stump. I will, however, point out a few additional errors made by the majority in their opinion regarding the admissibility of Dr. Stump's testimony.
1. The Majority Ignores the Fact That Dr. Stump Admitted he Has no Knowledge of the Applicable Standard of Care.
As I stated above, Idaho Code ยงยง 6-1012 and 6-1013 require that the expert witness in a medical malpractice action have "actual knowledge" of the standard of care "of the community in which such care allegedly was or should have been provided, as such standard then and there existed with respect to the class of health care provider that such defendant then and there belonged to and in which capacity he, she or it was functioning." For Dr. Stump's testimony to be admissible, he would have to have actual knowledge of the standard of care for either emergency room physicians or orthopedic surgeons practicing in Boise, Idaho, in August 1994. In his deposition, Dr. Stump admitted that he did not have that knowledge. Relevant excerpts of his testimony are as follows:
Q: Can you tell me generally what your conversation with Dr. Adornato was? As best you can tell us, tell us what you discussed with him.
A: About the medical standard of care in Idaho.
Q: Specifically what?
A: Specifically, the question whether there was anything that was not standard; whether he thought the standard of care was different from the general medical care that he and I may be practicing, et cetera.
Q: Can you remember with any specificity what he said, other than what you just said?
A: He said in his opinion the standard of care in Idaho, and Boise specifically, was similar to what he and I would be currently practicing on. He expressed an opinion that with the broad spread of medical knowledge and the availability of, basically, national meetings, that he felt that it would be unlikely that there would be any variations in medical care standards.
Q: Did you talk with any specificity as to types of doctors?
A: We discussed general medical care.
Q: Nothing more specific than that?
A: Not that I remember.
Q: Now, do you know what the routine was, or the standard was, in Boise, Idaho in 1994 for an orthopedic surgeon asked to evaluate a patient for low-back pain?
A: I have not talked to an orthopedic surgeon. I talked to a neurologist.
Q: So you would agree you don't know the standard for an orthopedic surgeon?
A: I have the statement from the neurologist concerning orthopedic assessment in Boise. I do not know an orthopod that practiced in Boise. I've not discussed what a typical orthopod would look at.
Q: And in fact, you indicated earlier, you talked about the standard in Boise, the medical standards, of neurology. Did you specifically mention to him orthopedic surgery?
A: I t
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Idaho Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|