P. and Husband v. Ronald Portadin, M.D., The Vineland Obstetrical and Gynecological Association, and Newcomb Hospital, 179 N.J. Super. 465

Summary

The New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division, addressed damages in a medical malpractice action arising from an allegedly unauthorized and negligent sterilization procedure that resulted in the birth of a normal child. The court held that the parents could not recover future child-rearing expenses under Berman v. Allan, but could pursue pregnancy- and delivery-related medical expenses, pain and suffering, lost wages, and consortium damages. The court also recognized potential recovery for consequences of intentionally performing surgery different from the procedure to which the patient consented, subject to the stated limitations and no duplication of damages.

Holdings

1. The trial judge properly treated defendants' summary-judgment motion as a motion to limit damages because doing so refined the issues for trial and promoted efficient case management.
2. Parents may not recover future expenses for raising, educating, and supervising a normal child born after an allegedly negligent sterilization procedure.
3. Plaintiffs may recover damages for the pain and suffering accompanying Mrs. P.'s pregnancy and delivery, wages lost during that period, and medical expenses attributable to the pregnancy and delivery; her husband may recover for loss of consortium and those attributable medical expenses.
4. If plaintiffs prove that Dr. Portadin performed an operation different from the one to which Mrs. P. consented and that the procedure deviated from accepted medical standards, they may recover damages resulting from that medical malpractice, subject to the limitations on damages stated in the opinion.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the trial judge properly treated defendants' summary-judgment motion as a motion to limit damages.
2. Whether Berman v. Allan barred recovery of medical expenses and future child-rearing expenses in an action arising from an allegedly negligent or unauthorized sterilization procedure.
3. Whether plaintiffs could recover damages for pregnancy- and delivery-related medical expenses, pain and suffering, lost wages, loss of consortium, and related expenses.
4. Whether plaintiffs could recover damages based on the alleged intentional performance of surgery different from the surgery to which Mrs. P. consented.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded