Monday, April 29, 2013

Tuer v. McDonald case brief

Tuer v. McDonald case brief
347 Md. 507

CASE SYNOPSIS: The Court of Special Appeals (Maryland) affirmed a judgment for defendant physicians in a medical malpractice action. Plaintiff surviving spouse appealed.

FACTS: The surviving spouse argued that the trial court erred in excluding evidence that the physicians changed the protocol regarding the administration of a drug to patients awaiting coronary artery bypass surgery after her husband died.

HOLDING:
The court held that the trial court did not err in excluding that evidence. Under Md. R. Evid. 5-407, evidence of subsequent remedial measures was not admissible to show either what the applicable standard of care was at the time of the occurrence or a deviation from that standard of care.

ANALYSIS:
The evidence was not admissible under the feasibility exception to the exclusionary rule because the physician did not testify that administering the drug would have been unsafe but that that it would not have been advisable. The evidence also was not admissible under the exception to the exclusionary rule to impeach a physician's statement that administering the drug would have been unsafe because it was clear that the physicians made a judgment call. The change in the protocol did not suggest that the physicians believed that their judgment call was not appropriate at the time.

CONCLUSION: The judgment in favor of the physicians was affirmed.

---
Interested in learning how to get the top grades in your law school classes? Want to learn how to study smarter than your competition? Interested in transferring to a high ranked school?


No comments:

Post a Comment

The Ins and Outs of Class Action Lawsuits: A Comprehensive Guide

Sometimes, you may buy a product only to find it defective. To make it worse, your search for the product reveals mass complaints. You can ...