A single, albeit lengthy, oral argument before the Pennsylvania Supreme Court last week posed two questions with potentially significant consequences for medical malpractice cases and civil litigation in general: How close is too close when it comes to a juror’s ties to a defendant’s employer? And can anyone other than a doctor participate in obtaining informed consent from a patient?
With regard to the first question, attorney Peter Paul Olszewski Jr., representing the plaintiffs in Shinal v. Toms, said during the Nov. 2 argument in Pittsburgh that there should be a per se exclusion of any juror who “has a family, financial or situational relationship, whether direct or indirect, with a defendant or a defendant’s employer.”
This content has been archived.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
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]
