M.C.M. ex rel. M.G.M. v. Milton S. Hershey Medical Center

Summary

The Pennsylvania Superior Court reversed summary judgment for Milton Hershey Medical Center in a corporate negligence action involving the alleged failure to use tandem mass spectrometry to screen a newborn for glutaric aciduria type I. The court held that Frye did not apply to expert testimony concerning the extent of hospitals’ use of the test in 1994 because that issue did not involve novel scientific evidence. The court also granted the medical center’s motion to strike the appellants’ reply brief for failing to comply with Pennsylvania appellate rules.

Holdings

1. The reply brief violated Pennsylvania Rule of Appellate Procedure 2113 by rearguing issues raised in the original brief and also exceeded the applicable page limitation under Rule 2135(2); the motion to strike was therefore granted.
2. Frye requires general acceptance of the principles and methodology underlying novel scientific evidence, but it does not require general acceptance of the expert's conclusions drawn from generally accepted principles and methodologies.
3. Frye does not apply to evidence concerning which hospitals had policies using tandem mass spectrometry to screen newborns for GA-I in 1994, because compiling that information is not novel scientific evidence.
4. Summary judgment was improper because the trial court erroneously excluded the expert testimony under Frye and thereby resolved the ultimate factual question that belonged to the jury.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the trial court improperly applied Frye to exclude expert testimony concerning the availability, reliability, and use of tandem mass spectrometry screening for GA-I in newborns in 1994.
2. Whether the trial court properly entered summary judgment after excluding that expert testimony.
3. Whether the appellants' reply brief should be stricken for improperly rearguing issues and exceeding the applicable page limitation.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded