St. Joseph's Mercy Health Center v. Edwards
2011 Ark. App. 560
| Ark. Ct. App. | 2011Background
- Caleb Edwards, six months old, was injured when nurse cut his left index finger during discharge from St. Joseph’s Mercy Health Center on Feb. 21, 2002.
- Caleb underwent surgery at Children’s Hospital with Dr. Andrew Markiewitz after his finger was nearly amputated.
- Post-discharge, Caleb wore a cast, required a pin, and received twice-daily injections of a blood thinner via home health nurse for two weeks.
- Follow-up in 2002–2003 noted potential future issues, including growth retardation, post-traumatic arthritis, and finger stiffness, predicted by Dr. Markiewitz and later by Dr. Bindra.
- In Sept. 2006, Dr. Dunaway opined in a letter that Caleb would likely have permanent disability, shorter finger, decreased sensation, and early arthritis due to the amputation.
- At trial, liability was admitted; the jury awarded $210,000 for Caleb’s damages, and post-trial motions for new trial/remittitur were denied.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admission of speculative testimony by Dr. Dunaway | Edwards argues Dunaway’s speculation about future arthritis was improper. | St. Joseph’s asserts testifying to future conditions was admissible as part of causation. | No reversible error; testimony not prejudicial given corroborating evidence. |
| Denial of new trial/remittitur for excessive damages | Edwards contends the award is not supported by evidence and is excessive. | St. Joseph’s argues the verdict has substantial support and should not be remittituried. | No abuse of discretion; substantial evidence supports the $210,000 award. |
Key Cases Cited
- FMC Corp. v. Helton, 360 Ark. 465 (2005) (abuse of discretion standard for evidentiary rulings)
- Aday v. Ark. Dep’t of Human Servs., 2010 Ark. App. 677 (2010) (preservation and prejudice in evidentiary rulings)
- Vaccaro Lumber v. Fesperman, 100 Ark. App. 267 (2007) (review of excessive damages with substantial evidence standard)
- Jacuzzi Bros., Inc. v. Todd, 316 Ark. 785 (1994) (speculative expert testimony and admissibility)
- E-Ton Dynamics Indus. Corp. v. Hall, 83 Ark. App. 35 (2003) (limits on speculative testimony in expert evidence)