Garber v. Christiana Care Health Services, Inc.

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