Saturday, April 28, 2007

Mississippi Supreme Court Upholds Exclusion of Neurosurgeon's Testimony on Standard of Care for Internal Medicine

A trial court did not abuse its discretion in holding that a neurosurgeon was not qualified to opine on the standard of care for a practitioner of internal medicine, Mississippi's highest court has held. The ruling does not rest on the mere difference in specialties, but rather on the neurosurgeon's more general lack of experience and knowledge in the relevant practice area. See Hubbard v. Wansley, No. 2005-CA-01055-SCT (Miss. Apr. 26, 2007).



Post a Comment

<< Home

Fed. R. Evid. 702: If scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue, a witness qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education, may testify thereto in the form of an opinion or otherwise, if (1) the testimony is based upon sufficient facts or data, (2) the testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods, and (3) the witness has applied the principles and methods reliably to the facts of the case.