In this medical malpractice case, the plaintiff appeals an opinion of the trial court excluding the opinion on oncology expert witness. The appeals court affirmed the lower court opinion.
Plaintiff sued defendant after she was injured after falling off a personal watercraft. Plaintiff hired a labels & warnings expert witness to assist in her case and defendant filed a motion to exclude. The court granted the motion.
Putative class action plaintiffs filed suit against the vehicle manufacturer for defects in the sunroofs of certain cars. Both parties filed motions to exclude three expert opinions. The court denied the three motions.
In the case, the plaintiff seeks a declaratory judgment against defendant regarding language in a lease agreement. Both parties hired real estate valuation expert witnesses and both filed motions to exclude. The court denied these motions.
Plaintiff fell off a tree stand ladder manufactured by the defendant. Plaintiff sued and hired an expert witness to help prove his case. The defendant hired two experts as well. Both parties filed motions to exclude. The court denied these motions.
In the Matter of Isaac C. (Isom C.), it was alleged that a child under eighteen years of age was was abused. The New York County Family Court found that during pertinent time period respondents lived together in the home of the paternal grandparents. On December 23, 2015, the parents brought Isaac to Mt. Sinai Hospital after noticing swelling in the child’s leg. Examination and tests at Mt. Sinai revealed a transverse femur fracture and, according to Mt. Sinai physicians, a classic metaphyseal fracture (CML) and a distal radial buckle fracture.
The trial upon the petition encompassed nine days from May to August 2016. Dr. O’Hara and Dr. Henrietta Rosenberg, Radiologist-in-Chief at Kravis Children’s Hospital at Mt. Sinai Hospital, testified for petitioner as an Radiology Expert Witness. All respondents testified on their own behalf and Dr. Grimm (via subpoena), Dr. Levenbrown and Dr. Michael Holick, who was qualified as an Endocrinology Expert Witness, Vitamin D and metabolic bone disease, testified as experts for respondents. Dr. O’Hara presented brief rebuttal testimony. The primary issue at trial was whether or not ACS carried its burden of proving abuse in light of expert testimony proffered by respondents asserting that Isaac’s injuries resulted from the conflation of extreme Vitamin D deficiency and metabolic bone disease.
The court concluded that that Isaac’s fractures, given his underlying medical conditions, resulted from normal handling. Dr. Levenbrown testified that Isaac’s bone fragility was such that even holding his hand or hugging him normally could have resulted in fractures. The three Expert Witnesses called by respondents testified that the deep tissue swelling on the child’s right leg was consistent with accidental injury, most likely from minor weight bearing. To the extent that the limited scientific literature introduced into evidence had direct relevance to Isaac’s fractures, it contained support for the possibility of this child’s injuries being caused by his underlying medical conditions. Dr. Levenbrown’s and Dr. Holick’s expert testimony as to Isaac’s vitamin D deficiency and rickets and how these conditions likely manifested themselves as the child’s fragility fractures appear sound to the court and as more nuanced, more thoroughly conducted analyses of the subject child’s fractures. Even if, as petitioner posits, a relatively small fraction of children with rickets suffers the number and types of injuries occurring herein, the one of ten, one of a hundred, or even one in a thousand cases involve at least once child. The preponderance of the credible evidence indicates that this appears to be that case.
Defendant appealed her conviction of habitual impaired driving, arguing that the lower court erred when it allowed the state’s expert opinion on retrograde extrapolation. The court concluded that the lower court did err, but this did not prejudice the outcome of the case.
Plaintiff sued Defendant for products liability for foam insulation that was installed in the their home. They hired three experts and the defendants filed motions to exclude their testimony.
Plaintiff sued defendant for negligence when a live electrical wire caused injury to their minor child. The plaintiff hired three expert witnesses, which were challenged by defendant. The court denied the motion to exclude.