In medical malpractice cases, expert testimony often determines whether a plaintiff can present a viable claim to a jury. Courts must carefully balance the need for reliable expert opinions with the recognition that medicine involves overlapping knowledge across specialties. When trial courts apply overly restrictive standards to expert qualifications, they risk prematurely ending otherwise valid claims. As demonstrated in a recent New York decision, improper exclusion of expert testimony can lead to reversal and a new trial. If you suffered harm due to a surgical error, you should consider consulting with a Syracuse medical malpractice attorney to discuss what evidence you must produce to recover damages.
Factual Setting and Procedural History
Allegedly, the plaintiff commenced an action seeking damages for medical malpractice arising from a surgical procedure in which the decedent sustained a serious vascular injury during a minimally invasive operation. The defendant performed a robotic-assisted laparoscopic adrenalectomy during which a major vein was damaged, leading to complications that formed the basis of the malpractice claim.
Reportedly, the case proceeded to trial, where the plaintiff sought to introduce testimony from a board-certified general surgeon to establish the applicable standard of care and to allege departures from it during the procedure. The trial court granted the defendants’ oral motion to preclude the plaintiff’s expert from testifying on the ground that the expert lacked specific experience with robotic-assisted procedures, and subsequently granted an oral motion to dismiss the complaint. Continue Reading ›
Syracuse Medical Malpractice and Personal Injury Lawyer Blog





