Bass v. Bobo
| Docket Number: | 2006-CA-00843-COA Linked Case(s): 2006-CA-00843-COA ; 2006-CT-00843-SCT |
|
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 09-25-2007 Opinion Author: MYERS, P.J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Medical malpractice - Expert testimony - M.R.E. 702 - Sufficiency of evidence Judge(s) Concurring: KING, C.J., LEE, P.J., IRVING, CHANDLER, GRIFFIS, BARNES, ISHEE, ROBERTS AND CARLTON, JJ. Procedural History: Jury Trial Nature of the Case: CIVIL - MEDICAL MALPRACTICE |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 08-05-2005 Appealed from: Hinds County Circuit Court Judge: Winston Kidd Disposition: JURY VERDICT IN FAVOR OF DEFENDANT Case Number: 251-02-1871CIV |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | BOBBY D. BASS, JR. |
JAMES M. PRIEST, JR.
ROBERT B. OGLETREE |
||
| Appellee: | RICHARD HUNT BOBO, M.D. | CHRIS J. WALKER RACHEL L. WILSON |
|
|
Synopsis provided by:  If you are interested in subscribing to the weekly synopses of all Mississippi Supreme Court and Court of Appeals hand downs please contact Tammy Upton in the MLI Press office. |
|
| Topic: | Medical malpractice - Expert testimony - M.R.E. 702 - Sufficiency of evidence |
| Summary of the Facts: | Bobby Bass, Jr. brought a medical malpractice suit against Dr. Richard Bobo alleging substandard pre-operative evaluation and post-operative care, as well as a lack of informed consent. The jury returned a verdict in favor of Dr. Bobo. Bass appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Expert testimony Before trial, Bass moved the court to exclude the expert witness testimony of Dr. Bobo’s designated expert, asserting that the testimony was unreliable because his medical opinions were based upon unreliable principles and in conflict with Bass’ provided medical literature. The court denied the motion, and Bass argues that the expert’s experience in treating patients with Bass’ conditions is limited at best, because he has treated less than ten Chiari II patients and has only performed the decompression surgery that Dr. Bobo performed three or four times. There is no requisite number of surgeries that a physician must perform before one may be qualified as an expert. Thus, the trial court did not err under M.R.E. 702 in finding that the expert’s experience in treating Chiari II patients and performing the decompression surgery was sufficient to qualify him as an expert. While Bass argues that the expert’s testimony is unreliable because it is in conflict with the standards required by the provided medical literature, the record reflects that the expert sufficiently overcame the alleged conflict. Issue 2: Sufficiency of evidence Bass argues that the evidence presented at trial was insufficient to support a jury’s finding that Dr. Bobo did not breach the applicable standard of care in assessing the shunt function prior to releasing Bass post-surgery. Whether or not the actions or inactions of Dr. Bobo before and after the surgery constituted malpractice essentially boils down to a “battle of the experts,” through which the jury determined the victor to be Dr. Bobo. Evidence was presented by experts on both sides, but ultimately the jury found that Dr. Bobo’s position prevailed. A trial court cannot disturb a verdict without more than present in this case. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
