After extensive briefing and oral arguments by Doug Leak, the Ohio Supreme Court agreed with the position taken by Mr. Leak on behalf of the physician. In its decision, the Ohio Supreme Court set forth three holdings that will be invaluable to the defense of medical malpractice cases, as well as other civil lawsuits, in the future...
Roetzel’s Board-Certified Appellate Specialist, Doug Leak, obtained a favorable decision from the Ohio Supreme Court on October 24, 2013 in Moretz vs. Muakkassa, Slip Opinion No. 2013-Ohio-4656, which held that a physician in a medical malpractice case was denied a fair jury trial as a result of several errors committed by the trial court. In reversing an adverse jury verdict and court of appeals decision, the Ohio Supreme Court remanded the case for a completely new trial, holding that the trial court abused its discretion in a number of ways, which deprived the physician of a fair trial by jury. The decision of the Ohio Supreme Court in Moretz is especially important because the Court clarified several longstanding legal debates on issues pertaining to the trial of civil matters.
After extensive briefing and oral arguments by Doug Leak, the Ohio Supreme Court agreed with the position taken by Mr. Leak on behalf of the physician. In its decision, the Ohio Supreme Court set forth three holdings that will be invaluable to the defense of medical malpractice cases, as well as other civil lawsuits, in the future:
- When both the content and the form of a proposed interrogatory are proper, Civ.R. 49 imposes a mandatory duty upon the trial court to submit the interrogatory to the jury, in order to be able to test the findings of the jury to the evidence produced at trial.
- R.C. 2317.421 applies equally to plaintiffs and defendants and as such, the defense is not required to produce expert testimony for the admission of evidence of write-offs reflected on medical bills and statements. Instead, documentation by medical providers as to the amount accepted as full payment for a medical service is prima facie evidence of the reasonable value of medical services and admissible at trial.
- Illustrations from medical textbooks are subject to the learned-treatise hearsay exception set forth in Evid.R. 803(18) and therefore shall not be admitted into evidence as an exhibit over the objection of a party.
With the Moretz decision in hand, all litigants and courts in Ohio can rely upon the decision when addressing these three legal issues.
For further information regarding the Moretz decision and its implications for the defense of medical malpractice claims, please contact the following Roetzel attorneys:
|Anna Moore Carulas 216.615.7401 email@example.com Elizabeth Nocera Davis 330.849.6621 firstname.lastname@example.org Jessica L. Davis 614.723.2033 email@example.com Stacy Ragon Delgros 330.849.6620 firstname.lastname@example.org Thomas A. Dillon 614.723.2007 email@example.com Robert B. Graziano 239.649.2728 firstname.lastname@example.org||Joseph E. Herbert 216.615.7411 email@example.com Michael J. Hudak 330.849.6704 firstname.lastname@example.org R. Mark Jones 216.615.4820 email@example.com Ingrid Kinkopf-Zajac 216.615.7415 firstname.lastname@example.org Doug Leak 216.615.4835 email@example.com Tammi J. Lees 216.696.7562 firstname.lastname@example.org|