Lee v. Suess, 24236

Citation318 S.C. 283,457 S.E.2d 344
Decision Date07 March 1995
Docket NumberNo. 24236,24236
PartiesMitchell LEE and Mary Lee, Petitioners, v. Steven SUESS, M.D., Carolina Health Care, P.A., Kenneth Smith, M.D., and Grand Strand Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, P.A., Defendants, Of whom Steven Suess, M.D., and Carolina Health Care, P.A., are Respondents. . Heard
CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of South Carolina

Charles L. Henshaw, Jr., and O. Fayrell Furr, Jr., both of the Law Offices of Furr and Henshaw, Columbia, for petitioners.

David A. Brown, Aiken; and Andrew F. Lindemann, Columbia, for respondents.

Donald V. Richardson, Charles E. Carpenter, Jr., and Deborah H. Sheffield, all of Richardson, Plowden, Grier & Howser, Columbia, for defendants Kenneth Smith and Grand Strand Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, P.A.

ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF APPEALS

MOORE, Justice:

This case is before us on a writ of certiorari to review the unpublished decision of the Court of Appeals affirming the trial judge's refusal to qualify an expert witness. We reverse.

Petitioners Mitchell and Mary Lee commenced these consolidated actions for medical malpractice and loss of consortium seeking recovery for damages arising from the amputation of Mr. Lee's left leg. Mr. Lee's leg was amputated after it was discovered that a lesion on some existing scar tissue was malignant. Prior to the amputation, Mr. Lee was treated by Dr. Smith, a plastic surgeon, and respondent Dr. Suess, a family practitioner. The Lees alleged both doctors were negligent in their medical care.

At trial, the Lees called Dr. Shafiroff, a plastic reconstructive surgeon. After Dr. Shafiroff testified regarding his qualifications, the trial judge found him qualified as an expert in the field of plastic surgery but not in the field of family practice. Dr. Shafiroff proceeded to give his expert opinion regarding the care rendered by the plastic surgeon, Dr. Smith, but he was not allowed to testify regarding Dr. Suess's care. At the close of the Lees' case, the trial judge directed a verdict in favor of Dr. Suess on the ground the Lees failed to present any evidence to establish a breach of the standard of care applicable to family practitioners. 1

On appeal, the Lees contended the trial judge erred when he refused to qualify Dr. Shafiroff as an expert in the field of family practice simply because family practice was not Dr. Shafiroff's area of specialization. See Creed v. City of Columbia, --- S.C. ----, 426 S.E.2d 785 (1993) (a physician is not incompetent to testify merely because he is not a specialist in that particular medical field). The Court of Appeals agreed the trial judge erred but found the error harmless since the record indicated Dr. Shafiroff did not have the requisite training or experience to render an expert opinion on family practice.

ISSUE

Did the Court of Appeals err in finding no reversible error in the failure to qualify Dr. Shafiroff?

DISCUSSION

The Lees contend the Court of Appeals overlooked Dr. Shafiroff's background in teaching and interacting with family practitioners and argue that any defects in his qualifications should have gone to the weight of his testimony and not its admissibility. We agree.

Dr. Shafiroff testified that in addition to his practice in plastic surgery, he is a professor who teaches family practitioner residents how to identify skin cancers and perform biopsies, including biopsies on ulcers that have failed to heal. Family practitioners at the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
33 cases
  • State v. Lyles
    • United States
    • South Carolina Court of Appeals
    • 6 de junho de 2008
    ... ... Irick, 344 S.C. 460, 463, 545 S.E.2d 282, 284 (2001) (citing Lee v. Suess, 318 S.C. 283, 285, 457 S.E.2d 344, 346 (1995)); accord State v. Edwards, 374 S.C. 543, 553, 649 S.E.2d 112, 117 (Ct.App.2007); State v. Sweet, ... ...
  • State v. Martucci
    • United States
    • South Carolina Court of Appeals
    • 24 de setembro de 2008
    ... ... Irick, 344 S.C. 460, 463, 545 S.E.2d 282, 284 (2001) (citing Lee v. Suess, 318 S.C. 283, 285, 457 S.E.2d 344, 346 (1995)); accord State v. Sweet, 374 S.C. 1, 5, 647 S.E.2d 202, 204-205 (2007); State v. Adkins, 353 S.C ... ...
  • State v. Kirton
    • United States
    • South Carolina Court of Appeals
    • 17 de dezembro de 2008
    ... ... Irick, 344 S.C. 460, 463, 545 S.E.2d 282, 284 (2001) (citing Lee v. Suess, 318 S.C. 283, 285, 457 S.E.2d 344, 346 (1995)); accord State v. Sweet, 374 S.C. 1, 5, 647 S.E.2d 202, 204-205 (2007); State v. Adkins, 353 S.C ... ...
  • Fields v. REGIONAL MED. CENTER ORANGEBURG
    • United States
    • South Carolina Court of Appeals
    • 14 de abril de 2003
    ... ... Gooding, 326 S.C. at 253, 487 S.E.2d at 598; Lee v. Suess, 318 S.C. 283, 285, 457 S.E.2d 344, 346 (1995). An expert is not limited to any class of persons acting professionally. Gooding, 326 S.C. at 253, 487 ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT