 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
COX v. JONES5/15/1991
The issue in this medical malpractice action is whether plaintiffs had lost the right to introduce expert testimony because of their failure to designate an expert within the time required by Iowa Code section 668.11 (1987). The district court sustained defendants' motion to strike plaintiffs' designation of their only expert on the ground that the expert was certified over a year past the statutory deadline. The court then granted defendants' summary judgment motion on the basis that plaintiffs could not establish liability without expert testimony. We agree with the district court's ruling and vacate the court of appeals' decision reversing it.
In November 1985, defendant ophthalmologist, Charles E. Jones, performed a cataract removal operation on Shirley Cox's left eye and implanted an intraocular lens. Cox returned to the Jones Eye Clinic, P.C., owned by defendant Jones, for two follow-up visits in January and February 1986. Cox claims she contacted defendant's clinic again in December 1986, regarding her deteriorating vision. She contends that the clinic staff requested that she pay $50.00 or provide proof of insurance prior to an appointment because her outstanding bills had not been paid. Cox then saw another physician, Larry M. Zweben, who referred her to University Hospitals and Clinics in Iowa City where emergency surgery was performed on December 18 for a detached retina of the left eye. Cox maintains that she sustained injuries causing almost total blindness in her left eye. [470 NW2d Page 25]
In May 1988, Cox and her husband filed this action against Jones and his clinic. Defendants filed an answer on June 9, 1988. The 180-day statutory deadline for certifying an expert witness expired in December 1988. Plaintiffs neither filed a certification nor requested an extension from the court before the 180-day deadline expired in December 1988. On January 9, 1990, plaintiffs filed a certification designating Zweben as their expert.
Defendants moved to strike the designation of plaintiffs' expert witness on the ground that plaintiffs filed the certification thirteen months past the 180-day deadline required by section 668.11. The district court sustained defendants' motion to strike Zweben's expert testimony on the issue of medical negligence or standard of care. However, the court did not prohibit Zweben from testifying regarding his care and treatment of Cox. The court noted that plaintiffs never asked the court for an extension of the 180-day statutory deadline as permitted by Iowa Code section 668.11(2); however, the court made it clear that plaintiffs had not shown good cause for leave to extend the time period.
Defendants then moved for summary judgment, contending that the lack of any expert evidence precluded plaintiffs from proving any of their medical negligence claims. The district court granted summary judgment and dismissed plaintiffs' lawsuit.
On appeal, plaintiffs first challenge the ruling striking their designation of an expert. Second, plaintiffs maintain that the district court erred in granting summary judgment. We address these claims in turn.
I. Designation of expert witness. Plaintiffs urge that defendants had adequate notice of Zweben's involvement in this case and have not been prejudiced by any delay in designating Zweben as an expert. They emphasize that their answers to interrogatories given in July 1989 indicated that Zweben was Cox's treating physician and had knowledge of the facts regarding his treatment of Cox. Also, plaintiffs urge that Cox described the treatment rendered by Zweben in a deposition taken in July 1989. However, plaintiffs simply ignore the fact that the interrogatory answers and depo
Page 1 2 3 Iowa Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|