Trial court erred in holding medical malpractice defense counsel in contempt for medical expert's mention of decedent's smoking habit because there was no evidence that counsel intentionally violated any court order. Reversed.
July 01, 2016 at 12:00 AM
1 minute read
Civil Contempt • Sanctions • Due Process • Foundational Order
Sutch v. Roxborough Mem’l Hosp., PICS Case No. 16-0770 (Pa. Super. June 15, 2016) Gantman, P.J. (79 pages).
Trial court erred in holding medical malpractice defense counsel in contempt for medical expert’s mention of decedent’s smoking habit because there was no evidence that counsel intentionally violated any court order. Reversed.
Presented by BigVoodoo
The Legal Intelligencer honors lawyers leaving a mark on the legal community in Pennsylvania and Delaware.
This conference aims to help insurers and litigators better manage complex claims and litigation.
Recognizing innovation in the legal technology sector for working on precedent-setting, game-changing projects and initiatives.
McManimon, Scotland & Baumann, LLC is seeking talented and motivated associate attorneys for several positions. Candidates must be admi...
Lower Manhattan firm seeks a litigator with at least 2-4 years of experience in all aspects of commercial litigation (i.e., depositions and ...
A prestigious matrimonial law firm in Garden City is seeking a skilled Associate Attorney with 5 to 7 years of experience in family law. The...
