141 Conn. App. 594
Conn. App. Ct.2013Background
- plaintiff Philip Filippelli III sues orthopedic surgeon Dennis M. Rodin and Waterbury Orthopaedic Associates, P.C. for medical malpractice; alleged delay in diagnosing compartment syndrome and performing fasciotomy; trial concerns expert testimony on standard of care and credibility; journal article and expert deposition testimony at issue; trial occurred in May 2011; jury found no breach of standard of care by Rodin; court proceedings addressed evidentiary rulings on learned treatises and impeachment evidence; appellate review applied abuse-of-discretion standard and harmful-error analysis.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether journal article evidence was wrongly excluded or limited | Filippelli argues learned-treatise rule allowed article to impeach Rodin and confirm Krasnick | Rodin and Bazos did not rely on the article as standard authority; late disclosure prejudicial | No reversible error; court did not abuse discretion; article not used as substantive authority for Krasnick; credibility use limited but not harmful |
| Whether the court improperly limited cross-examination using the journal article against Bazos | Article could impeach Bazos’ credibility as to standard of care | No foundation showing article was authoritative; cross-exam limited to relevant portions | No abuse; foundational requirements under § 8-3 not met; limits proper and not prejudicial |
| Whether evidence of other malpractice actions against Rodin or Bazos was properly excluded | Evidence of bias from other actions should be admitted to impeach credibility | Unduly prejudicial; probative value outweighed; not central to care standard | Evidence properly excluded as prejudicial; offer-of-proof and related edits deemed harmless |
| Whether the failure to mark deposition certification page for identification was reversible | Certification page of Bazos deposition in another case should be identified | Substance preserved; document not admissible and marked; harmless error | Harmless error; permissible to read document into record; no prejudice to plaintiff |
Key Cases Cited
- Hurley v. Heart Physicians, P.C., 298 Conn. 371 (Conn. 2010) (standard for reviewing evidentiary rulings; harm analysis when improper)
- Kaplan v. Mashkin Freight Lines, Inc., 146 Conn. 327 (Conn. 1959) (learned treatise admissibility; expert reliance prerequisite)
- Musorofiti v. Vlcek, 65 Conn. App. 365 (Conn. App. 2001) (periodical vs. article; authority of periodical; gatekeeping by trial court)
- Pestey v. Cushman, 259 Conn. 345 (Conn. 2002) (two-part foundation for learned-treatise evidence; cross-examination use)
- Cousins v. Nelson, 87 Conn. App. 611 (Conn. App. 2005) (limits on prior-action impeachment; relevance vs. prejudice)
- Hayes v. Manchester Memorial Hospital, 38 Conn. App. 471 (Conn. App. 1995) (impeachment credibility in medical-malpractice context; centrality of credibility)
- State v. Silva, 201 Conn. 244 (Conn. 1986) (marking exhibits; harmless error rule when proper ruling)