Syracuse Medical Malpractice and Personal Injury Lawyer Blog
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.
Allegedly, a judgment was entered dismissing the action in favor of the defendants, and the plaintiff appealed the ruling.
Expert Qualifications in New York Medical Malpractice Cases
On appeal, the court reviewed whether the trial court properly exercised its discretion in excluding the plaintiff’s expert and dismissing the complaint. The court emphasized the well-established principle that a medical expert need not be a specialist in the precise procedure at issue to offer an opinion on the standard of care, so long as the expert possesses the requisite knowledge, training, and experience.
Applying this standard, the court examined the qualifications of the plaintiff’s expert. The expert was a board-certified general surgeon with experience in adrenal and laparoscopic surgeries and demonstrated familiarity with the relevant anatomy and surgical principles. The expert further testified that core surgical practices, including the identification and protection of surrounding structures, remain consistent regardless of whether a procedure is performed using traditional, laparoscopic, or robotic techniques.
The court found that this foundation was sufficient to establish the expert’s competence to testify regarding the applicable standard of care. The trial court erred by focusing too narrowly on the expert’s lack of specific experience performing robotic-assisted adrenalectomies. The court clarified that such limitations affect the weight of the testimony, which is for the jury to evaluate, rather than its admissibility.
Because the exclusion of the expert effectively deprived the plaintiff of the ability to establish a prima facie case, the subsequent dismissal of the complaint was also improper. The court determined that the plaintiff should have been permitted to present the expert testimony and proceed with the case.
Accordingly, the court reversed the judgment, denied the defendants’ motions to preclude and dismiss, reinstated the complaint, and remitted the matter for a new trial.
Connect with a Dedicated Syracuse Medical Malpractice Attorney
If you were injured due to an improperly performed surgical procedure, it is wise to connect with an attorney regarding your potential claims. The dedicated Syracuse medical malpractice attorneys at DeFrancisco & Falgiatano Personal Injury Lawyers are adept at holding negligent healthcare providers accountable, and if you hire us, we will advocate zealously on your behalf. You can call us at 833-200-2000 or reach out online to arrange a confidential consultation.
