Gibson v. Soin

Summary

The Ohio Second District Court of Appeals affirmed judgments in favor of the defendants in a medical malpractice and wrongful death action. The court held that the plaintiffs’ cardiology expert was not competent under Evid.R. 601(B)(5)(c) to testify about the standards of care applicable to a pain-management physician and an anesthesiologist. Because the expert’s testimony was excluded, the trial court properly granted a directed verdict and denied the plaintiffs’ motion for a new trial.

Holdings

1. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in excluding Dr. Utlak's testimony because he did not establish that he practiced in the same or a substantially similar specialty as defendants, or that the standards of care applicable to a cardiologist evaluating a referred patient were similar to those applicable to a pain-management physician and anesthesiologist reviewing presurgical cardiac testing.
2. The trial court did not err in denying the Gibsons' motion for a new trial because the exclusion of Dr. Utlak's testimony was proper.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the trial court abused its discretion under Evid.R. 601(B)(5)(c) by finding cardiologist Dr. David Utlak incompetent to testify about the standards of care applicable to a pain-management specialist and anesthesiologist.
2. Whether the trial court erred in denying the Gibsons' motion for a new trial based on the exclusion of Dr. Utlak's testimony.
3. Whether the trial court's directed verdict for defendants should be affirmed after exclusion of the Gibsons' only proffered medical-standard-of-care expert.

Disposition

affirmed