![]() Gielchinsky.) The case concerns the physician's alleged deviation from accepted medical standards in failing to remove pacemaker wires that had been implanted in the patient's chest during cardio-thoracic surgery. (Henceforth "defendant" refers only to Dr. The contested evidence in this case consisted of an opinion of an expert witness, originally consulted by plaintiff Bernard Graham (henceforth we refer only to the injured plaintiff), that no medical malpractice had occurred in the course of defendant Gielchinsky's treatment of plaintiff. At the same time, however, the Rules do not address whether a litigant may use that information at trial when obtained through means other than discovery. Absent exceptional circumstances, our Rules of Civil Procedure do not permit discovery of the names or opinions of experts that a party has consulted but does not intend to call at trial. This appeal concerns an apparent gap in our Rules of Civil Procedure dealing with the discovery and use of the opinion evidence of an expert consulted by an adversary. The opinion of the Court was delivered by O'HERN, J. Moryan argued the cause for respondent (Connell, Foley & Geiser, attorneys Ernest W. ![]() ![]() Garruto argued the cause for appellants (Garruto, Galex & Cantor, attorneys). ISAAC GIELCHINSKY, M.D., DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT, AND NEWARK BETH ISRAEL MEDICAL CENTER, DEFENDANT. ![]() BERNARD GRAHAM AND CLARA GRAHAM, PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS, ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |