Quirion v. Forcier

632 A.2d 365 (1993)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

Decedent complained of chest pains from 1978 until his death in 1985, at thirty-three. During the period between 1982 and October 3, 1985, he was treated by Dr. James Holcomb, his primary physician; Dr. Richard Beloin, partner of Dr. Holcomb; and Dr. Alan Feltmarch, an emergency room physician at North Country Hospital. Decedent became dissatisfied with these doctors and consulted D. Following a one-hour examination D sent letters to Decedent and Dr. Holcomb outlining his conclusions. The letter to Dr. Holcomb outlined the medical history, as conveyed by Decedent, and the examination findings, and concluded, 'I do not believe that Mr. Quirion's chest pain is related to coronary artery disease.' The letter suggested that the pain might be related to 'reflux esophagitis' and recommended certain tests. It also suggested that the symptoms might be brought on by anxiety. There was no follow-up to this letter by Dr. Holcomb. About a month later, Decedent died of a heart attack, and an autopsy showed blockage of the coronary arteries. P sued the doctors and retained Dr. Alan Markowitz as her expert witness. Dr. Markowitz was deposed. P settled with the original three doctors, leaving only D. Because Dr. Markowitz would not be available for trial, P conducted a second deposition of him by video, with cross-examination by counsel for D. During the video deposition D asked questions related to the settlement attempting to show that Dr. Markowitz changed his testimony between the two depositions. In the first deposition, Dr. Markowitz testified that the negligence of Doctors Holcomb, Beloin, and Feltmarch was primarily responsible for Decedent's death and that D was largely blameless. Dr. Markowitz changed his analysis with respect to D after learning of the settlement and targeted him with responsibility. D argued that the evidence of the settlements was necessary to show the reason for Dr. Markowitz's change of testimony. P moved in limine to exclude 'any references to culpability on the part of former defendants Holcomb, Beloin, and Feltmarch' as irrelevant. The trial court admitted the evidence at trial. The court ruled that the fact of the settlement could be used in cross-examining Dr. Markowitz and was related to his credibility. The court stated in its instructions to the jury that the fact of the settlements could be considered only as bearing on Dr. Markowitz's credibility and not on D’s' negligence. The court also stated that the jury was not to consider whether the former doctors were negligent or how that negligence would compare with that of D. A Dr. Thomas Ryan testified for D. After two days of testimony, the jury found that D had not been negligent in the treatment of Decedent. P appealed.