This Blog/Web site is made available by the lawyer or law firm publisher for educational purposes only as well as to give you general information and a general understanding of the law, not to provide specific legal advice. By using this Blog/Web site you understand that there is no attorney-client relationship between you and the Blog/Web site publisher. The Blog/Web site should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a licensed professional attorney in your state.
Search This Blog
Tuesday, May 05, 2009
Medical Malpractice: Expert Qualifications
The Western Section of the Tennessee Court of Appeals just issued a new opinion relating to the proper qualifications of a plaintiff's expert in a medical malpractice case. In this case, the plaintiff's expert did not practice in the same area as the defendants, which is not per se fatal to this type of claim. However, the opinion stresses the importance of an expert being familiar with the defendants' area of practice. The Court found that the plaintiff's expert was not familiar with the defendants' area of practice and granted summary judgment to the defendants.
The style of the case is McDaniel v. Rustom, No. W2008-00674-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. May 5, 2009).