You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Mary Henry v. Obstertrics and Gynecology Consultants

Citation: Not availableDocket: E2001-01246-COA-R3-CV

Court: Court of Appeals of Tennessee; December 10, 2001; Tennessee; State Appellate Court

Original Court Document: View Document

Narrative Opinion Summary

An expert witness's testimony was excluded due to a determination of incompetence under Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-26-115. Despite being a qualified specialist and competent in patient care, the witness's ability to testify as an expert was challenged based on complex interpretations of the statute. The opinion highlighted that the witness asserted a national standard of care exists in medical training and that the quality of healthcare provided by specialists remains consistent across different communities. The concurring judge, Herschel Pickens Franks, suggested that the General Assembly should revise the statute to better reflect current medical training practices and healthcare delivery in Tennessee.

Legal Issues Addressed

Exclusion of Expert Testimony under Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-26-115

Application: The court excluded the testimony of an expert witness who, despite being a qualified specialist, was deemed incompetent under the statute due to complex interpretations.

Reasoning: An expert witness's testimony was excluded due to a determination of incompetence under Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-26-115.

Judicial Suggestion for Legislative Revision

Application: The concurring opinion by Judge Herschel Pickens Franks suggested legislative action to update the statute to align with contemporary medical practices and healthcare standards in Tennessee.

Reasoning: The concurring judge, Herschel Pickens Franks, suggested that the General Assembly should revise the statute to better reflect current medical training practices and healthcare delivery in Tennessee.

Standard of Care in Medical Expert Testimony

Application: The expert witness argued for a national standard of care, asserting that medical training and healthcare quality are consistent across communities, which was a point of contention in the court's decision.

Reasoning: The opinion highlighted that the witness asserted a national standard of care exists in medical training and that the quality of healthcare provided by specialists remains consistent across different communities.