Monica A. Gutierrez v. Jose Luis Vargas, M.d.

Summary

The court held that the trial court acted within its discretion by allowing two pathologists who participated in Monica Gutierrez’s treatment to testify as treating-physician fact witnesses, and by allowing a second pathology expert to testify in rebuttal about evidence first addressed by the defense expert. It also held that a single inaccurate statement during closing argument did not create sufficient prejudice to require a new trial, so it quashed the appellate decision on those issues and remanded for further proceedings. Justices Canady and Polston, dissenting, would have dismissed the review because they believed the court lacked jurisdiction.