Filter This View

  • Ungurian v. Beyzman

    Publication Date: 2020-05-18
    Practice Area: Medical Malpractice
    Industry: Health Care
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Dubow
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 20-0510

    Trial court properly ordered hospital to produce its event report, serious safety event rating meeting summary, minutes from the patient safety committee, root cause analysis report, quality improvement staff peer review and credentialing in a medical malpractice action because the documents were not protected from disclosure under the Patient Safety Quality Improvement Act and the Peer Review Protection Act. Affirmed.

  • Hoover v. Muncy Valley Hosp.

    Publication Date: 2020-05-18
    Practice Area: Civil Procedure
    Industry: Health Care
    Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Lycoming County
    Judge: Judge Tira
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 20-0402

    The court refused to consider plaintiff's supplemental expert report, which was filed long after the discovery deadline and only upon the filing of defendants' motion for summary judgment, since allowing plaintiff to supplement her discovery under the circumstances would not be "just. " The court granted defendants' motion for summary judgment.

  • Rolon v. Davies

    Publication Date: 2020-05-18
    Practice Area: Medical Malpractice
    Industry: Health Care
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Stabile
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 20-0509

    Trial court erred in entering nonsuit in favor of surgeon in medical malpractice action because decedent's administrator's expert rendered his testimony to a reasonable degree of certainty but court affirmed jury's verdict in favor of other defendants and ordered a new trial only against surgeon. Vacated in part and affirmed in part.

  • Trigg v. Children's Hosp. of Pittsburgh of UPMC

    Publication Date: 2020-05-11
    Practice Area: Civil Procedure
    Industry: Health Care
    Court: Supreme Court
    Judge: Justice Todd
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 20-0482

    Superior court erred in considering appellees' argument that trial court erred by not personally observing the demeanor of prospective jurors during voir dire because appellees waived the issue for appellate review by making no contemporaneous or pretrial objections to trial judge's absence. Vacated.

  • Kinard v. Butler Mem'l Hosp.

    Publication Date: 2020-05-11
    Practice Area: Medical Malpractice
    Industry: Health Care
    Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Lawrence County
    Judge: Judge Motto
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 20-0357

    The court sustained a preliminary objection, because plaintiffs' certificate of merit only supported their claim for vicarious liability, not corporate negligence. The complaint contained sufficient facts to allow plaintiffs' punitive damages claim to go forward.

  • Law Journal Press | Digital Book

    Texas Insurance Coverage Litigation: The Litigator’s Practice Guide 2024

    Authors: Amy Elizabeth Stewart

    View this Book

    View more book results for the query "*"

  • Beard v. Williams

    Publication Date: 2020-05-04
    Practice Area: Medical Malpractice
    Industry: Health Care
    Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Northampton County
    Judge: Judge Murray
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 20-0444

    The court denied defendant physician's motion for summary judgment, because genuine issues of material fact existed regarding matters associated with a collaboration agreement between the physician and a nurse practitioner.

  • Leo v. Geisinger Cmty. Med. Ctr

    Publication Date: 2020-05-04
    Practice Area: Discovery
    Industry: Health Care
    Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Lackawanna County
    Judge: Judge Nealon
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 20-0447

    While plaintiff was entitled to responses to discovery demands served upon defendants long before the applicable discovery deadline, she could not compel the defendant hospital to answer requests for admissions served long after the deadline had expired. The court granted defendant's motion for a protective order and granted plaintiff's motion to compel in part.

  • Fisher v. Corr. Care, Inc.

    Publication Date: 2020-05-04
    Practice Area: Employment Litigation
    Industry: Health Care
    Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Lackawanna County
    Judge: Judge Nealon
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 20-0445

    While defendant demonstrated plaintiff's lack of due diligence in prosecuting this matter with reasonable promptness and the lack of any compelling reason for the delay, the company failed to show that it suffered any actual prejudice resulting from a substantial diminution of its ability to properly defend plaintiff's case. The court denied defendant's motion for a judgment of non pros.

  • Adkins v. Johnson & Johnson

    Publication Date: 2020-04-27
    Practice Area: Civil Procedure
    Industry: Health Care | Manufacturing
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Ford Elliott
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 20-0426

    Plaintiff's inconsistent verdict challenge could not be corrected in pre-trial proceedings or during trial and only ripened after the verdict was announced; therefore, she properly raised the challenge for the first time in a post-trial motion. The superior court affirmed a trial court order granting plaintiff a new trial.

  • Commonwealth v. Cook

    Publication Date: 2020-04-27
    Practice Area: Evidence
    Industry: Health Care
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Olson
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 20-0428

    The trial court erred in finding that the psychotherapist-client privilege in 42 Pa.C.S. §5944 applied to incriminating statements defendant made to a fellow patient while at a mental health treatment center since he did not make the statements to a member of his treatment team during treatment and the statements were not confidential. The superior court vacated in part and remanded.