Dr. Tirone David

The plaintiffs brought a medical malpractice action following a balloon angioplasty procedure that resulted in a ruptured thoracic aorta.

The patient survived but suffered paraplegia and cognitive deficits, eventually passing away years later.

The court found that the interventional cardiologist and vascular surgeon breached the standard of care by failing to consult with a cardiac surgeon and by transferring the patient to the coronary care unit instead of directly to the operating room after an interim endovascular repair.

The court concluded that this delay in obtaining open cardiac surgery caused the patient's neurological injuries.

Judgment was granted for the plaintiffs for an agreed-upon amount of damages.

The plaintiffs in a medical malpractice action sought to adduce opinion evidence from two treating cardiac surgeons as participant experts.

The defendants brought a motion to exclude portions of the proposed evidence of one of the surgeons, arguing it went beyond the scope permitted by Westerhof and that the surgeon lacked impartiality and specific expertise.

The court allowed the motion in part, excluding opinions on the standard of care prior to the surgeon's involvement and on whether earlier surgery would have changed the outcome, as these were not based on his observation or participation.

However, the court permitted the surgeon to opine on matters arising directly from his involvement, holding that concerns about his partiality should go to the weight of the evidence rather than its admissibility.