Exclusion of defense evidence about the risks and complications of a procedure during a medical negligence trial would effectively impose strict liability on doctors, a defense attorney argued before the Pennsylvania Supreme Court on Tuesday.

John Conti of Dickie, McCamey & Chilcote, who represented an obstetrical and gynecological surgeon, made that argument in Mitchell v. Shikora, which last year resulted in a Superior Court decision that said evidence about the risks and complications of a hysterectomy was prejudicial and should not have been admitted at trial.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]