Hand v. South Ga. Urology Ctr. PC

The trial court abused its discretion in excluding relevant and material impeachment evidence.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

In this civil action, George and Betty Hand sued Dr. Gilbert Gonzalez and his practice group, South Georgia Urology Center, P.C. collectively “defendants”, for damages they allegedly suffered as a result of Dr. Gonzalez’s medical malpractice. Following a jury verdict and judgment in favor of defendants, the Hands appeal, arguing that the trial court erred in 1 excluding impeachment evidence, 2 failing to instruct the jury on the law pertaining to spoliation of evidence, 3 prohibiting cross-examination of Dr. Gonzalez regarding the past suspension of his medical license, and 4 finding that sufficient evidence supported the jury’s verdict. For the reasons noted infra, we agree that the trial court erred in excluding impeachment evidence, and therefore, reverse the trial court’s ruling in that regard and remand the case for a new trial.

Construed in favor of the jury’s verdict,1 the evidence shows that in late 2005, Dr. Gonzalez, a urologist, diagnosed George Hand as having an enlarged prostate. And after discussing various treatment options, Dr. Gonzalez ultimately recommended transurethral microwave thermotherapy, using a Targis System device manufactured by Urologix, Inc. In this procedure, the physician places the Targis device’s catheter, housing a microwave antenna, into the patient’s urethra near the prostate gland and inserts the device’s rectal thermometer into the patient’s rectum directly adjacent to the prostate gland. The antenna then delivers microwave energy into the patient’s prostate, causing cellular breakdown that leads to a reduction in the size of the prostate. During the procedure, the rectal thermometer monitors the temperature of the prostate gland and automatically halts the procedure if the temperature exceeds acceptable levels.

Hand v. South Ga. Urology Ctr. PC

The trial court abused its discretion in excluding relevant and material impeachment evidence.

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to Daily Report