McLean v. Liberty Health System
62 A.3d 922
N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div.2013Background
- Sixteen-year-old Kevin McLean suffered MRSA infection after two Greenville Hospital ER visits; infection led to paralysis and death years later.
- Plaintiff Lisa McLean, as administratrix, sued Greenville Hospital, Dr. Khan, and related entities for medical malpractice.
- Trial focused on whether doctor deviated from the standard of care; defense argued symptoms did not indicate infection.
- Trial court restricted each side to one expert on any subject; plaintiff planned multiple experts, including two ER physicians and radiologists.
- Jury found no malpractice; plaintiff sought new trial on several grounds, including expert restriction and trial conduct.
- Court reversed and remanded for a new trial, holding the one-expert limit was an abuse of discretion and that certain evidentiary issues and jury instructions require reevaluation.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Limiting experts to one per side on central issue of liability | McLean contends two ER experts were needed for corroboration | Duplication wastes time; one expert suffices | Reversed; trial court erred in limiting experts and must allow additional testimony. |
| Defense misstatement to jury about sole ER expert | Statement misrepresented expert availability and undermined proof | Remark was hyperbolic; not fatal | Reversible error requiring new trial. |
| Proximate causation/apportionment instruction | Should not allocate proximate causation by percentages | Evidence supported some apportionment | Remanded to tailor jury charge; percentage apportionment not warranted. |
Key Cases Cited
- Scafidi v. Seiler, 119 N.J. 93 (N.J. 1990) (causation framework for pre-existing conditions)
- Verdicchio v. Ricca, 179 N.J. 1 (N.J. 2004) (burden of apportionment of damages in pre-existing conditions)
- Reynolds v. Gonzalez, 172 N.J. 266 (N.J. 2002) (standard for proximate causation with pre-existing conditions)
- Green v. N.J. Mfrs. Ins. Co., 160 N.J. 480 (N.J. 1999) (Rule 403 probative value balancing guidance)
- Nowacki v. Cmty. Med. Cntr., 279 N.J. Super. 276 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 1995) (evidence exclusion under N.J.R.E. 808; expert reports)
- Cardell, Inc. v. Piscatelli, 277 N.J. Super. 149 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 1994) (essential trial conduct; right to present proofs)
- Peterson v. Peterson, 374 N.J. Super. 116 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2005) (trial fairness and admissibility considerations)