Manning v. Bellafiore

991 A.2d 399 (R.I. 2010) · Supreme Court of Rhode Island · April 12, 2010 · No. No. 2005-320-Appeal

Summary

The Rhode Island Supreme Court reviewed an order granting Kathryn Manning a new trial in a wrongful-death and medical-malpractice action against Peter J. Bellafiore, M.D. The court considered whether the trial justice properly granted a new trial based on alleged discovery abuse and the jury verdict being against the fair preponderance of the evidence. The court affirmed the Superior Court's order.

Court
Supreme Court of Rhode Island
Writing for the Court
Chief Justice Suttell; Suttell, C.J.; Flaherty, J.; Robinson, J.
Jurisdiction
Rhode Island
Decision date
April 12, 2010
Docket number
No. 2005-320-Appeal
Procedural posture
The defendant physician appealed from a Superior Court order granting the plaintiff's motion for a new trial after a jury returned a verdict for the defendant in a wrongful-death and medical-malpractice action.
Standard of review
The Supreme Court reviews an order granting a new trial with great weight and will affirm if the trial justice conducted the appropriate analysis, did not overlook or misconceive material evidence, and was not otherwise clearly wrong. In ruling on a new-trial motion, the trial justice acts as a superjuror, independently weighing the evidence and assessing witness credibility.
Precedential value
Published, precedential opinion of the Supreme Court of Rhode Island
Parties
Peter J. Bellafiore, M.D. v. Kathryn Manning, the Manning plaintiffs
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

medical malpracticewrongful deathmotion for new trialstandard of reviewappellate procedure

Practice areas

medical malpracticewrongful deathcivil procedureappellate procedureremedies

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the Superior Court trial justice abused his discretion by granting a new trial against Dr. Bellafiore as a sanction for discovery abuse.
  2. Whether the trial justice's determination that the jury's verdict for Dr. Bellafiore was against the fair preponderance of the evidence was clearly wrong.
  3. Whether alleged factual inaccuracies and credibility-analysis errors in the trial justice's ruling required reversal of the new-trial order.

Holdings

  1. An appellate court will affirm a trial justice's decision granting a new trial when the trial justice conducted the appropriate analysis, did not overlook or misconceive material evidence, and was not otherwise clearly wrong; the ruling is afforded great weight.
  2. The trial justice properly granted a new trial against Dr. Bellafiore because the evidence established that the applicable standard of care required prompt vascular imaging and the evidence supported findings that Dr. Bellafiore failed to obtain timely imaging and administered aspirin rather than Heparin.
  3. Minor misstatements concerning witnesses' specialties, names, or testimony do not require reversal when they do not materially affect the trial justice's core evaluation of the evidence or credibility.

Key quotations

When ruling on a motion for a new trial, the trial justice acts as a 'superjuror' and 'should review the evidence and exercise his or her independent judgment in passing upon the weight of the evidence and the credibility of the witnesses.' (408)
It is our conclusion that the trial justice conducted the appropriate analysis, did not overlook or misconceive material evidence, and was not otherwise clearly wrong. (411)

Factual background

Michael Manning suffered an initial stroke after losing consciousness and was treated at South County Hospital by Dr. Bellafiore. Attempts to obtain a closed MRI/MRA were unsuccessful because of Manning's claustrophobia, and the hospital lacked the capability to perform a conventional cerebral angiogram or angioplasty. Manning later suffered a catastrophic second stroke, was transferred to Massachusetts General Hospital, and died after life support was withdrawn. At trial, the plaintiff's experts testified that the standard of care required prompt vascular imaging and treatment, including possible Heparin administration and angioplasty, while Dr. Bellafiore disputed those opinions and claimed that he had offered sedation alternatives that Manning refused.

Procedural history

Kathryn Manning sued Dr. Bellafiore, Dr. McNiece, and South County Hospital for negligence and wrongful death. After trial, the jury returned a verdict for all defendants. The Superior Court granted Manning a new trial against Dr. Bellafiore, finding that discovery abuse warranted a sanction and that the verdict was against the fair preponderance of the evidence, while denying a new trial against the other defendants. Dr. Bellafiore appealed, and the Supreme Court of Rhode Island affirmed.

Remand instructions

The papers of the case were to be returned to the Superior Court. The opinion did not provide additional substantive remand instructions.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…