Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001-7228 CivilCYRUS GREENBERG and LOUISE GREENBERG, his wife, Plaintiffs VS. JEFFREY SEDLACK, M.D. and CARLISLE HOSPITAL AND HEALTH SERVICES, Defendants IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA 01-7228 CIVIL CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED MOTION TO PRECLUDE EXPERT TESTIMONY AND FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT BEFORE BAYLEY, HESS AND OLER, J.J. MEMORANDUM AND ORDER In this case, the defendant seeks to preclude testimony from G. Gary Kirchner, M.D. on the grounds that Dr. Kirchner's letter of August 10, 2003, is deficient. The deficiencies cited are that the opinions expressed appear to be based on personal belief rather than a reasonable degree of medical certainty and that the expert does not set forth specific instances or examples showing that Dr. Sedlack's conduct was beneath the standard of care. It is true that Dr. Kirchner's letter contains less detail than is customary. At this stage of the proceedings, however, we are satisfied that Dr. Kirchner's letter is adequate as a threshold matter. First, while he does state that certain conclusions are based on what he "personally believe[s]," he goes on to say that he holds "all of these beliefs to a reasonable degree of medical 01-7228 CIVIL certainty." A fair reading of the first page of Dr. Kirchner's letter reveals his concern with the plaintiff' s pre-operative risk factors. Given those risk factors, Dr. Kirchner opines that one of the options which should have been explored was "an open procedure done under local anesthesia thus eliminating cardiac stress of a general anesthetic." As the plaintiff observes, the matter of informed consent is very much an issue in this case. On the second page of his letter, Dr. Kirchner opines that the complications which resulted in this case would not have occurred in the absence of negligence. See Hightower-Warren v. Silk, 698 A.2d 52 (Pa. 1997). We agree with the defendant that Dr. Kirchner's report does not contain a specific reference to the standard of care or how that standard may have been breached in this case. These are not the only claims, however, which have been raised by the plaintiffs. For that reason, we enter the following order. AND NOW, this ORDER day of January, 2004, the motion of the defendant to preclude expert testimony and for summary judgment is DENIED. BY THE COURT, Richard H. Wix, Esquire For the Plaintiffs Michael M. Badowski, Esquire For Defendant Dr. Sedlack Kevin A. Hess, J. :rlm 2 CYRUS GREENBERG and LOUISE GREENBERG, his wife, Plaintiffs VS. JEFFREY SEDLACK, M.D. and CARLISLE HOSPITAL AND HEALTH SERVICES, Defendants AND NOW, this IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA 01-7228 CIVIL CIVIL ACTION - LAW JURY TRIAL DEMANDED MOTION TO PRECLUDE EXPERT TESTIMONY AND FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT BEFORE BAYLEY, HESS AND OLER, J.J.~ ORDER day of January, 2004, the motion of the defendant to preclude expert testimony and for summary judgment is DENIED. BY THE COURT, Richard H. Wix, Esquire For the Plaintiffs Michael M. Badowski, Esquire For Defendant Dr. Sedlack Kevin A. Hess, J. :rlm The Honorable J. Wesley Oler, Jr. did not participate in the decision of this matter.