Garber v. Christiana Care Health Services, Inc. ( 2014 )


Menu:
  •           IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
    IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY
    ROGER K. GARBER,                 )
    )
    Plaintiff,            ) C.A. No.: N14C-04-065 FSS
    )
    v.                    )
    ) TRIAL BY JURY DEMANDED
    CHRISTIANA CARE HEALTH           )
    SERVICES, INC., a/k/a CHRISTIANA )
    CARE HEALTH SYSTEM, INC., IPC    )
    THE HOSPITALIST COMPANY, INC./   )
    IPC-HOSPITALISTS OF DELAWARE,    )
    INFECTIOUS DISEASE ASSOCIATES,   )
    P.A., BIKASH BOSE, M.D. and      )
    NEUROSURGERY CONSULTANTS, P.A., )
    )
    Defendants.           )
    Submitted: June 13, 2014
    Decided: June 18, 2014
    ORDER
    Upon Review of the Affidavits of Merit
    Plaintiff submitted five affidavits of merit accompanying his medical
    negligence complaint. Defendants have each moved to have the court review them,
    in camera, to determine whether they comply with 18 Del. C. § 6853(a)(1) and (c).1
    1
    18 Del. C. § 6853(d).
    In Delaware, a healthcare negligence lawsuit must be filed with an
    affidavit of merit, signed by an expert and accompanied by the expert’s curriculum
    vitae.2 The expert must be licensed to practice as of the affidavit’s date and engaged
    in the same or similar field as Defendant in the three years immediately preceding the
    alleged negligent act.3 The affidavit must state that reasonable grounds exist to
    believe Defendant was negligent in a way that proximately caused Plaintiff’s injury.4
    The statute’s requirements are purposefully minimal. “In order to satisfy the prima
    facie burden, an Affidavit of Merit must only contain an expert’s sworn statement that
    medical negligence occurred, along with confirmation that he or she is qualified to
    proffer a medical opinion.”5 An affidavit of merit that tracks the statutory language
    complies with the statute.6
    Plaintiff’s five affidavits each address a specific Defendant. After in
    camera review, the court finds:
    1.     An expert witness has signed each affidavit;
    2.     A current curriculum vitae was filed with each affidavit;
    3.     At the time each affidavit was sworn, each expert was a licensed
    physician or nurse who treated patients and/or taught in the same
    2
    Id. § 6853(a)(1).
    3
    Id. § 6853(c).
    4
    Id. § 6853(c).
    5
    Dishmon v. Fucci, 
    32 A.3d 338
    , 342 (Del. 2011).
    6
    
    Id. at 342-343
    .
    2
    or similar field of medicine as the respective Defendant within the
    three years preceding the alleged negligent acts;
    4.    Each expert was Board certified in the same or similar field of
    medicine as the respective Defendant;
    5.    The affidavits state, with reasonable medical probability, that
    there are grounds to believe each Defendant breached its standard
    of care;
    6.    Each expert further opines that the respective Defendant’s breach
    proximately caused Plaintiff’s injuries.
    Following Defendants’ motions, Plaintiff responded.           Plaintiff’s
    responses are unnecessary and are not called for by the statute. They have no bearing
    on this order.
    Considering the above, the court finds the affidavit of merit, as to each
    Defendant, complies with 18 Del. C. § 6853(a)(1) and (c).
    IT IS SO ORDERED.
    /s/ Fred S. Silverman
    Judge
    cc:   Prothonotary (Civil)
    Dennis D. Ferri, Esquire
    Courtney R. Hamilton, Esquire                 Theodore J. Segletes, III, Esquire
    Gregory S. McKee, Esquire                     John D. Balaguer, Esquire
    Ryan T. Keating, Esquire                      Christine Kane, Esquire
    Dawn C. Doherty, Esquire                      Neilli M. Walsh, Esquire
    3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 14C-04-065

Judges: Silverman

Filed Date: 6/18/2014

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 10/30/2014