Laura Cooney-Koss and Jerome Koss, Below v. Jennifer H. Barlow, M.d., Below, Appellee A. Diane McCracken, M.d., And…

Summary

The court affirmed the denial of McCracken's motion for judgment as a matter of law because the plaintiffs' expert testimony created a jury question on whether McCracken failed to pursue appropriate conservative treatments before performing the hysterectomy. It held that the trial court abused its discretion by excluding the treating anesthesiologist's routine-practice testimony, evidence of Laura's possible bleeding disorder, and medical treatises usable for impeachment; the combined errors denied McCracken a fair trial and required a new trial. The court also affirmed summary judgment for Barlow because no expert connected Barlow's allegedly improper suturing to the hemorrhage that led to the hysterectomy.