Provost v. Fletcher Allen Health Care, Inc.

Summary

The Vermont Supreme Court reversed and remanded summary judgment for the defendant in a medical malpractice action arising from an allegedly negligent injection that injured the plaintiff’s radial nerve. The court held that the plaintiff’s expert affidavit, although sparse, articulated a sufficient theory of breach and causation to create a genuine issue of material fact, and that competing causation theories should not be weighed on summary judgment.

Holdings

1. The affidavit was sufficient to create a genuine issue of material fact because, although sparse, it articulated that Dr. Esparza breached the standard of care by inserting the needle too deeply and that the breach proximately caused Provost's radial-nerve injury.
2. The trial court could not weigh the plaintiffs' expert theory against other possible causes of the injury or assess the comparative plausibility of competing factual explanations on summary judgment.
3. The appeal was governed by de novo review of summary judgment rather than abuse-of-discretion review of an evidentiary ruling.

Questions Presented

1. Whether plaintiffs' expert affidavit sufficiently established a medical-malpractice theory to create a genuine issue of material fact under Vermont's summary-judgment standard.
2. Whether the trial court improperly weighed the plaintiffs' causation theory against competing possible explanations for the injury.
3. Whether review should proceed under the abuse-of-discretion standard applicable to evidentiary foundation rulings or under the de novo standard applicable to summary judgment.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded