10/30/2009
Below is a list of medical malpractice Appellate Court opinions issued in October 2009:
AC29944 - Bennett v. New Milford Hospital, Inc. ("The plaintiff, Richard Bennett, Jr., the administrator of the estate of the decedent, Richard Bennett, Sr., appeals from the judgment of the trial court dismissing in part his medical malpractice action against the defendants, New Milford Hospital, Inc. (hospital), and Frederick Lohse, a physician, on the basis of the plaintiff’s failure to comply with the requirements of General Statutes § 52-190a. The plaintiff claims that because he attached to his complaint a good faith certificate from his attorney in addition to a letter from a similar health care provider stating the belief that there existed evidence of medical negligence, the court improperly granted Lohse’s motion to dismiss pursuant to § 52-190a (c).") 8/13/2009
Earlington v. Anastasi - SC18042, SC18044 (Medical Malpractice; "On appeal,the defendants claim that the trial court improperly: (1) included specifications of negligence in the jury interrogatories that the court previously had ruled were not supported by the evidence; (2) permitted the jury to consider specifications of negligence in the jury interrogatories that were not supported by the evidence; (3) failed to order a new trial on the ground that the jury’s responses to the interrogatories were internally inconsistent; and (4) failed to order a remittitur of the economic damages awarded to Omar.") 6/30/2009
Below is a list of medical malpractice Appellate Court opinions issued in June 2009:
AC29597 - Sawicki v. New Britain General Hospital ("The plaintiff claims on appeal that the court improperly denied her motion to set aside the verdict and for a new trial on the basis of juror misconduct. In response, the defendant claims, as an alternate ground for affirmance, that if the court had precluded the testimony of the plaintiff’s expert witness as requested, the plaintiff could not have met her burden of persuasion, entitling the defendant to a directed verdict.")
AC29687 - Cockayne v. Pilon ("In this professional negligence action, the plaintiff... appeals to this court following the denial of her motion to open the judgment of dismissal rendered by the trial court in favor of the defendant, Philip Pilon, her former dentist. On appeal, the plaintiff claims that the court abused its discretion in denying her motion to open.") 6/25/2009
Dias v. Grady - SC18265 (Medical malpractice; motion to dismiss; whether CGS §52-190a required plaintiff to attach written opinion addressing causation of injury.) 6/1/2009
Below is a list of medical malpractice Appellate Court opinions issued in May 2009:
AC28932 - Kelly v. Albertsen ("The issue presented in this case is whether the trial court improperly failed to allow the plaintiff, Robert J. Kelly, to conduct discovery prior to ruling on the motion to dismiss filed by the defendant, Peter C. Albertsen, for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.") 4/30/2009
Below is a list of medical malpractice Appellate Court opinions issued in April 2009:
AC29010 - Votre v. County Obstetrics & Gynecology Group, P.C. ("We are called on first to decide whether the court properly determined that the allegations of the plaintiff mother’s complaint involve the negligence of a health care provider and then, whether the court properly dismissed the action for lack of a written opinion of a similar health care provider.")
AC29459 - Jackson v. Tohan ("The plaintiff...appeals from the summary judgment rendered by the trial court in favor of the defendant, Narendra Tohan, on the ground that the plaintiff’s claims were not timely filed within the two year statute of limitations under General Statutes § 52-584.1 On appeal, the plaintiff claims that the court improperly decided the factual issue concerning when she had actual or constructive knowledge that she had sustained actionable harm.")
AC28646 - Klein v. Norwalk Hospital ("The plaintiff claims that the court improperly denied his motion to set aside the verdict and for a new trial. Specifically, the plaintiff claims that the court improperly (1) precluded the testimony of his expert witness concerning causation because the witness was not disclosed properly pursuant to Practice Book § 13-4 (4)2 and (2) admitted the testimony of the defendant’s expert witness concerning causation.")
3/31/2009
Below is a list of medical malpractice Appellate Court opinions issued in March 2009:
AC29295 - Boczer v. Sella ("The plaintiff...individually and as executor of the estate of his late wife, Patricia Ann Boczer (decedent), appeals from the judgment of the trial court denying his motion for review of costs taxed by the court clerk. Specifically, the plaintiff maintains that the court improperly (1) taxed the expert witnesses’ fees of the defendants Enzo Sella and Connecticut Orthopaedic Specialists, P.C., and (2) taxed the total bill of costs against his claim for loss of consortium.") 1/30/2009
Martinelli v. Fusi - SC17988 ("In this appeal, we consider whether the continuous course of conduct doctrine or the continuing treatment doctrine tolls the three year period of repose beyond the date on which a patient terminated the physician-patient relationship, when the physician was aware of test results that revealed the patient’s need for follow-up treatment, but failed to notify the patient of those results because he did not subjectively believe that they revealed a need for further treatment.") 1/20/2009
Kelly v. University of Connecticut Health Center - SC17884 ("The plaintiff claims that the trial court improperly concluded that: (1) his claim against the state, alleging medical malpractice and lack of informed consent in connection with his surgery for kidney stones and chronic kidney dysfunction, had been presented untimely pursuant to General Statutes § 4-148; and (2) No. 05-4, § 1, of the 2005 Special Acts (S.A. 05-4), enacted to remedy the plaintiff’s late notice of his claim in the present action, is unconstitutional as an exclusive public emolument prohibited by article first, § 1, of the Connecticut constitution.") 1/16/2009
Wyszomierski v. Siracusa - SC18154 ("Medical malpractice; whether trial court abused discretion in permitting defendant physician to testify about his reasoning and actions in treating decedent after court had granted plaintiff's motion in limine precluding expert testimony; whether trial court's factual findings that defendant adequately informed decedent about surgery to remove gallbladder and that defendant met standard of care for informed consent were supported by evidence and were not clearly erroneous; whether trial court's rejection of opinion testimony by plaintiff's expert witness was clearly erroneous.") 10/9/2008
Smith v. Andrews - SC17745 (Medical Malpractice; Standard of Care; Whether Trial Court Properly Admitted Evidence Regarding the Standard of Care Employed by Anesthesiologists who Worked at the same Hospital as the Defendant Anesthesiologist.) 5/22/2008
Bednarz v. Eye Physicians of Central Connecticut, P.C. - SC17934 (Medical malpractice; motion for summary judgment; whether statute (§ 52-584) of limitations tolled by continuing course of treatment and continuing course of conduct doctrines; standard of review of trial court decision granting motion for summary judgment; doctrines of continuing course of treatment and continuing course of conduct, compared and discussed.) [Docket Summary] 5/15/2008
Monti v. Wenkert - SC18028/18029 (Medical Malpractice; Compromise Verdicts; Whether Settlement Agreement Should have been Disclosed; Whether Precomplaint Inquiry Requirement Under General Statutes § 52-190a was Satisfied; Whether Offer of Judgment Interest was Properly Awarded.) [Docket Summary] 5/14/2008
Novak v. Levin - SC17857/17858 (Appellate Procedure; Whether the Appellate Court Lost Jurisdiction to Open a Judgment of Dismissal Following Expiration of the Practice Book Deadlines Governing Reconsideration or Review of that Order.) [Docket Summary] 5/5/2008
Dimmock v. Lawrence & Memorial Hospital, Inc. - SC18053, 18054 [Medical malpractice; summary judgment; whether proposed amendments to the complaint should have been permitted under the relation back doctrine; whether plaintiff's expert's testimony was properly precluded as being outside the scope of the operative complaint; whether trial court improperly rendered summary judgment in favor of the defendants because she lacked an expert witness to testify regarding the standard of care and causation] [docket summary]
Dissent SC18053, 18054
3/20/2008
The following Connecticut Supreme Court decisions were released today:
|
|
|
|