 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Cheeks v. Bio-Medical Applications8/4/2005
a dialysis clinic, a nephrologist and a radiologist are held. McCaffrey, 784 So. 2d at 203. Dr. Myers was not board certified in family practice or any other specialty; was not a member of the American Medical Association; was not on staff at any hospital and could not admit patients to any hospital; had no special training or experience in the field of nephrology; had never been inside a dialysis clinic in Mississippi; had never participated in a dialysis procedure; had never operated a dialysis machine; had never monitored a patient while he was receiving the actual dialysis treatment; relied on the expertise of a nephrologist when determining whether one of his patients was receiving the appropriate type of dialysis treatment or responding to the treatment as he should; had never inserted a gortex graft; had never seen a graft inserted into a patient; had never inserted a dialysis needle into a graft; had never inspected a graft which was implanted in a patient; had never recommended that a graft be replaced; was, by his own admission, not qualified to render opinions as to when or whether a graft should be replaced, because these medical opinions fall within a specialized area in which he had no experience or training; had never read any literature on the specific type of graft at issue; and did not know who manufactured the graft in question or the manufacturer's recommendation as to the life of the graft. Dr. Myers further admitted that it was the job of a radiologist to determine whether a particular graft is functioning properly; that a radiologist inspected Henry's graft approximately 30 days prior to Henry's death and found it to be operating properly; and that he (Dr. Myers) could find nothing wrong with that radiologist's report.
. Even though Dr. Myers stated that Bio-Medical was negligent by not providing Henry with written instructions, he admitted that Henry did exactly what he should have done when he first began to experience the bleeding -- apply pressure and then go to the emergency room if needed.
. We find that, under M.R.E. 702, Dr. Myers did not have the specialized knowledge to assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence concerning the dialysis procedure or the condition of the graft. West, 661 So. 2d at 719 (where plaintiff did not establish that her expert, an oncologist, was familiar with the standard of care of a gastroenterologist, expert's testimony was properly stricken); Thompson v. Carter, 518 So. 2d 609, 616-17 (Miss. 1987). Therefore, Mattie's claim of negligence against Bio-Medical fails. Sheffield v. Goodwin, 740 So. 2d 854, 856 (Miss. 1999) ("Absent error so obvious that a layman could easily determine fault, expert testimony is generally required to survive summary judgment and establish the negligence of a physician.")
CONCLUSION
. Because Dr. Myers was not competent to offer opinions as to the standard of care of dialysis clinics, the appropriate monitoring of the dialysis process or the appropriate procedures in inserting and maintaining dialysis grafts, we affirm the circuit court's grant of summary judgment to Bio-Medical Applications, Inc.
. AFFIRMED.
SMITH, C.J., COBB, P.J., CARLSON, DICKINSON AND RANDOLPH, JJ., CONCUR.
EASLEY AND GRAVES, JJ., DISSENT WITHOUT SEPARATE WRITTEN OPINION.
DIAZ, J., NOT PARTICIPATING.
Page 1 2 3 Mississippi Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|