Gonzales v. Nebraska Pediatric Practice

Summary

The Nebraska Supreme Court considered whether the law-of-the-case doctrine barred renewed challenges to the admissibility of an expert’s medical-causation testimony after remand. The court held that the prior Nebraska Court of Appeals decision conclusively settled the admissibility issue, including waived challenges under the Schafersman framework, and that the district court erred by excluding the testimony and granting summary judgment. The judgment was reversed and the cause remanded for further proceedings.

Holdings

1. The Court of Appeals' prior holding conclusively settled the admissibility of Lawrence's causation testimony, and the defendants' renewed Schafersman objections on remand were barred by the law-of-the-case doctrine.
2. A Schafersman objection must be made in a concise pretrial motion and stated with enough specificity to identify the particular deficiency and permit the court to determine the need and scope of pretrial proceedings; failure to do so waives the objection.
3. Summary judgment was unwarranted because reinstating Lawrence's testimony created a genuine dispute concerning causation, an essential element of the medical malpractice claim.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the law-of-the-case doctrine barred the defendants from renewing on remand their Schafersman-based objections to the admissibility of Dr. Lawrence's causation testimony.
2. Whether the district court improperly excluded Lawrence's testimony after the Nebraska Court of Appeals had previously held that he was qualified to testify on causation.
3. Whether summary judgment was proper after Lawrence's testimony was excluded.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded