Ricci v. Carp

Summary

The Hawaiʻi Intermediate Court of Appeals affirmed summary judgment for the medical-provider defendants in Gary J. Ricci’s medical malpractice action. The court held that the defendants satisfied their initial summary-judgment burden through expert declarations and reports, while Ricci offered no expert medical testimony establishing breach of the standard of care or a genuine issue for trial.

Holdings

1. A pro se litigant's failure to state alleged errors in precise compliance with HRAP Rule 28(b) does not foreclose consideration of an appeal when the litigant's argument can reasonably be discerned.
2. The grant of summary judgment was proper because the medical-provider defendants met their initial burden with expert evidence, and Ricci failed to present specific facts establishing a genuine issue for trial.
3. As a general rule, a medical malpractice claim based on negligent treatment cannot be established without expert medical testimony addressing the applicable medical standard of care.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the circuit court properly granted summary judgment to the medical-provider defendants.
2. Whether Ricci could establish negligent medical treatment without presenting his own expert medical testimony.
3. Whether Ricci's failure to comply precisely with Hawaiʻi Rules of Appellate Procedure Rule 28(b) required dismissal or foreclosed consideration of his appeal.

Disposition

affirmed