Scales v. Lackey Mem'l Hosp.
| Docket Number: | 2006-CA-00707-COA Linked Case(s): 2006-CA-00707-SCT2006-CA-00707 |
|
| Oral Argument: | 04-02-2008 | |
* This video is best viewed in the most current version of Google Chrome, Internet Explorer with Windows Media Player plug-in, or Safari (Mac Users). |
||
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 08-05-2008 Opinion Author: BARNES, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Medical malpractice - Expert testimony - M.R.C.P. 56(c), (e), (f) Judge(s) Concurring: KING, C.J., LEE AND MYERS, P.JJ., IRVING, CHANDLER, GRIFFIS, ISHEE, ROBERTS AND CARLTON, JJ. Procedural History: Summary Judgment Nature of the Case: CIVIL - MEDICAL MALPRACTICE |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 04-06-2006 Appealed from: SCOTT COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT Judge: Vernon Cotten Disposition: SUMMARY JUDGMENT GRANTED TO LACKEY MEMORIAL HOSPITAL Case Number: 2003-CV-107-SC-C |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | Brief(s) Available: | ||
| Appellant: | SHERRY SCALES |
MICHAEL P. YOUNGER |
||
| Appellee: | LACKEY MEMORIAL HOSPITAL | LOUIS G. BAINE, JAN F. GADOW |
|
|
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.C.P. 56(c), (e), (f) |
| Summary of the Facts: | Sherry Scales sued Lackey Memorial Hospital based on the hospital’s alleged negligence in failing to diagnose a heart attack in process and failure to utilize the applicable standard of care in her treatment. The court granted summary judgment in favor of Lackey Memorial, and Scales appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Scales argues that the trial court erred in granting summary judgment to Lackey Memorial when so little discovery had been conducted. According to Scales, the trial court should have granted a continuance so that Lackey Memorial could depose the expert witnesses identified in the interrogatory answers. Mississippi law requires a plaintiff in a medical malpractice action to produce sworn expert testimony supporting his or her claim in order to establish a prima facie case of malpractice. Therefore, a defendant in a medical malpractice action may meet its summary judgment burden by pointing out to the court that the plaintiff has failed to produce sworn expert testimony supporting his or her allegations. In this case, Lackey Memorial met its summary judgment burden by pointing out that Scales had failed to produce any sworn expert testimony establishing the essential elements of her medical malpractice claim. Once Lackey Memorial did so, the burden then shifted to Scales to come forth with sworn expert testimony stating that her physicians breached the applicable standard of care; Scales failed to meet this burden. Her unsworn answers to Lackey Memorial’s expert interrogatories were not sufficient to create a genuine issue of material fact. Moreover, the interrogatories were not sworn to by Scales, but only signed by her attorney. Therefore, the information provided in the supplemental answer was pure hearsay and M.R.C.P. 56(e) declares such to be incompetent in support of -- or in opposition to -- summary judgment. Scales argues that the trial court should have granted a continuance pursuant to M.R.C.P. 56(f) in order to allow for further discovery. There is no indication that Scales ever made a motion pursuant to Rule 56(f); rather, she waited until the day of the hearing to request a continuance from the trial court. In addition, Scales had ample time in which to produce sworn expert testimony supporting her malpractice allegations. Almost three years elapsed between the time Scales filed her complaint and the time the hearing was held on Lackey Memorial’s motion for summary judgment, and two years elapsed from the time Lackey Memorial served its interrogatories and requests for production of documents until the hospital filed its motion for summary judgment. Four months elapsed between the time the summary judgment motion was filed and the time the hearing on the motion was held, and pursuant to Rule 56©, Scales could have produced supporting affidavits at any time up until the day before the hearing. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
