Buja v. Morningstar, 96-76-M
| Decision Date | 23 January 1997 |
| Docket Number | No. 96-76-M,96-76-M |
| Citation | 688 A.2d 817 |
| Parties | Kayla BUJA et al. v. Howard W. MORNINGSTAR, M.D., et al. P. |
| Court | Rhode Island Supreme Court |
This case came before the Court on November 6, 1996, pursuant to an order directing the parties to appear and show cause why the issues raised by Kayla Buja's petition for certiorari filed after a trial justice of the Superior Court granted a motion in limine precluding the petitioner's expert witness from testifying should not be summarily decided.
After hearing the arguments of counsel and considering the memoranda submitted by the parties, we are of the opinion that cause has not been shown. The issues raised in the petition will be decided at this time.
In June of 1990, Brenda and Brian Buja (the Bujas) learned that Brenda Buja (Brenda) was pregnant. Brenda then enrolled in a clinic at Memorial Hospital where she received prenatal treatment from Linda Lacerte, M.D. (Dr. Lacerte), a doctor who at the time was a resident in family practice. On December 14, 1990, Dr. Lacerte and Howard W. Morningstar, M.D. (Dr. Morningstar), also a resident in family practice, managed Brenda's labor. Lawrence Culpepper, M.D. (Dr. Culpepper), supervised the two residents, but he left the hospital shortly before Brenda gave birth. At approximately 6:45 p.m., the doctor who relieved Dr. Culpepper delivered Kayla Joy Buja (Kayla) by emergency vacuum extraction. Doctors Lacerte and Morningstar also attended the delivery. Kayla was later diagnosed with cerebral palsy, spastic quadriplegia, and mental retardation, all of which resulted from oxygen deprivation that occurred at some point prior to delivery.
We conclude that the trial justice's decision was erroneous and was not in accord with our ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Sheeley v. Memorial Hosp.
...of our decisions in Marshall v. Medical Associates of Rhode Island, Inc., 677 A.2d 425 (R.I.1996), and more importantly Buja v. Morningstar, 688 A.2d 817 (R.I.1997), which have distinguished Soares and limited its holding to situations in which the physician-expert lacks knowledge, skill, e......
-
Debar v. Women & Infants Hosp.
...an expert must practice in the same specialty as the defendant to testify about the requisite standard of care. Buja v. Morningstar, 688 A.2d 817, 819 (R.I.1997) (per curiam); Marshall v. Medical Associates of Rhode Island, Inc., 677 A.2d 425, 426 (R.I.1996) (per curiam). We had said earlie......
-
Gallucci v. Humbryd, 96-84-A
...coextensive with that of the professional defendant can offer an opinion on the relevant standard of care. See Buja v. Morningstar, 688 A.2d 817 (R.I.1997) (per curiam) (concluding that obstetrician was qualified to testify as an expert in case alleging malpractice by family practitioner wh......
-
Price v. Califano
...to offer an opinion on standard of care. Debar v. Women and Infants Hosp., 762 A.2d 1182, 1186 (R.I. 2000); Buja v. Morningstar, 688 A.2d 817, 819 (R.I. 1997) (per curiam); Marshall, 677 A.2d at 426. There is no requirement that the witness be board certified in the defendant's specialty. M......