Crandell v. United States

703 F.2d 74 (4th Cir. 1983)

Facts

Seven-month-old Jennifer, just recovering from a cold, suffered a convulsion and immediately was taken to Quantico Naval Hospital. Her temperature registered 104 degrees, and a warrant officer, who was a physician's assistant, diagnosed Jennifer's condition as an upper respiratory infection. He gave her Tylenol to reduce the fever and sent her home. Her condition did not improve. Dr. Krenytzky examined her at the Naval Hospital. He diagnosed her condition as a severe ear infection and prescribed ampicillin and Actifed. Her condition deteriorated, and Dr. Hammer examined her at the Naval Hospital. He immediately noted symptoms of meningitis. Dr. Hammer, attempting no treatment, sent her to Walter Reed Hospital, where doctors diagnosed her condition as meningitis. Jennifer presently suffers from severe sequelae, including severe retardation. Ps had a bench trial. Ps called their medical expert to the stand and the judge refused to allow Ps to present their case in a proper manner. The judge made numerous and improper interjections all through the case but did so to such an extent P’s expert was unable to testify. The judge ridiculed one of P’s' experts while contorting his testimony. The judge also prevented effective cross-examination of the most important defense witness. The judge precluded Ps from effectively cross-examining D’s expert on facts in evidence, including the records which that expert relied upon in forming his opinion. The judge sua sponte prevented Ps from exploring that expert's change of opinion on the causation issue. He testified in his deposition and pretrial report and stated unequivocally that hypothyroidism overwhelmingly caused Jennifer's permanent injuries, discounting the meningitis almost entirely as a contributing factor. But at trial, he testified that it was impossible to isolate the damages attributable to meningitis from those allegedly caused by hypothyroidism. The judge even prohibited the expert from answering questions by Ps. The judge based his final opinion almost exclusively on the testimony of the government's expert. All of the findings in the court's memorandum opinion were lifted virtually verbatim from a report prepared by D’s expert. Lehman. (and the list of egregious conduct goes on and on). Ps appealed contending that they did not get a fair trial.