The National Trial Lawyers
  • Home
    • Meet Our Team
    • Contact Us
    • Mission & Goals
    • FAQ
  • Webinars
  • News
  • Membership Directory
    • Top 100 Map – Civil Plaintiff
    • Top 100 Map – Criminal Defense
    • Top 40 Under 40 Map – Civil Plaintiff
    • Top 40 Under 40 Map – Criminal Defense
  • Top 100
    • Civil Plaintiff Officers / Executive Committee
    • Criminal Defense Officers / Executive Committee
    • Benefits
    • About
    • Top 100 President’s Message
    • Diplomat
    • Membership Renewal
    • Member Profile Updates
    • Top 100 Badge
    • Media
  • Top 40
    • Civil Plaintiff Officers / Executive Committee
    • Criminal Defense Officers / Executive Committee
    • Top 40 Under 40 Trial Academy Bootcamp
    • Benefits
    • About
    • Top 40 President’s Message
    • Membership Renewal
    • Member Profile Updates
    • Top 40 Badge
    • Media
  • Specialty Assoc
    • About
    • Shop
    • Officers
    • Membership Renewal
    • Member Profile Updates
    • Media
  • Nominate
    • Top 100
    • Top 40
    • Specialty Association
    • Trial Lawyer Hall of Fame
    • Trial Lawyer of the Year
    • Trial Team of the Year
    • America’s Most Influential Trial Lawyer
    • America’s Most Influential Law Firm
    • Lifetime Achievement Award
  • Shop
  • Magazine
    • A-List
  • Education and Networking Agenda
    • Trial Lawyers Summit
      • Summit Sponsors
    • Top 40 Under 40 Trial Academy Boot Camp
    • Mass Torts Made Perfect
    • The Lanier Master Class 5.0 Trial Academy 2021
    • Webinars
  • Hall of Fame
    • Trial Lawyer Hall of Fame

Expert Witness Testimony Based on Personal Knowledge Admitted by Wisconsin Appeals Court

Posted on October 6, 2015 by Larry Bodine

witness in courtA Wisconsin appeals court permitted an expert medical witness’ testimony although he expert relied on personal knowledge without consulting medical literature in a childbirth medical malpractice case.

Braylon Seifert, who suffered permanent nerve damage at birth, and his guardian ad litem and parents filed suit against the physician who delivered him for negligence and lack of informed consent.

The trial court entered a $900,000 verdict against the defendant, Dr. Kay M. Balink.

Failed to meet the Daubert

Balink attempted to exclude testimony from Braylon’s standard of care expert witness, Dr. Jeffrey Wener because she believed it failed to meet the Daubert standard under a state statute that governs the admissibility of expert testimony.

Braylon’s mother received prenatal care from Balink, who performed routine tests and measurements to assess the health of the mother and child.

At birth, Braylon was stuck in the birth canal and the doctor diagnosed shoulder dystocia and then brachial plexus. Brachial plexus prevented the growth and use of Braylon’s left arm.

The court noted that Balink used a vacuum device to assist with delivery, which caused Braylon’s head to emerge but then retract.

Daubert Factors

Dr. Wener testified that the failure to use an ultrasound to diagnose the baby’s weight, performing a one hour glucose screening test versus a three-hour test, and the use of a vacuum system, taken together increased the chances of shoulder dystocia.

Balink argued the doctor’s testimony was not admissible because it was not derived from reliable principles or methods required by statute. Additionally she argued, Wener’s testimony was based on his personal preferences and not supported by medical literature.

For another interesting article, see NTL Webinar “When You Have to Abandon Your Own Expert Witness”

The court rejected Balink’s argument and looked to the federal interpretation for the rule to determine if the trial court erred. The relevant Wisconsin statute, 907.02, was modeled after the federal rule of evidence 702. With the Daubert standard, the primary focus is whether the witness had knowledge and experience as an indicator of reliability.

Additional factors under the Daubert standard include whether there is a known or potential error and whether the technique can be tested. The court was careful to note the test of reliability must be flexible and does not necessarily conform to a rigid checklist.

Testimony is Reliable

In assessing the trial court’s decision, the appeals court believed the use of personal knowledge based on extensive experience in the field did not preclude the reliability of the expert’s testimony.

The reliance on applicable medical journals or literature was not a determining factor of reliability, only a consideration under the Daubert factors.

Balink also argued the testimony was not admissible because the doctor did not apply the facts of the case to his opinions. The appellate court stated that failure to conduct a factual analysis did not affect the reliability of the testimony, but the weight.

Ultimately the court ruled the lower court did not abuse its discretion by allowing the expert’s testimony. The opinion was reliable because of Dr. Wener’s qualification and experience.

This case is Braylon Seifert, by his guardian ad litem v. Kay M. Balink, M.D. and ProAssurance Wisconsin Insurance Company, Appeal No. 2014AP195, District IV Court of Appeals.

Posted in Blog, Medical Malpractice, Trial Practice

Comments are closed.

News Categories

Subscribe to Blog and VFJ via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog, the Voice for Justice and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Read about other Top Jury Verdicts

Intel Ordered to Pay a $2.2B Settlement in Patent Infringement Case

Intel Ordered to Pay a $2.2B Settlement in Patent Infringement Case

Intel was told to pay $2.18 billion after losing a patent-infringement trial over technology related to chip-making.Intel inf[Read More...]
What is Sexual Harassment?

What is Sexual Harassment?

Sexual Harassment Defined: Legally, sexual harassment is a form of sex discrimination that violates Title VII of the [Read More...]
Facebook Pays $650M to Settle a Privacy Dispute

Facebook Pays $650M to Settle a Privacy Dispute

WASHINGTON: A US federal judge has given final approval to Facebook's US$650 million payment to settle a privacy dispute betw[Read More...]
Pharmaceutical Giant Johnson & Johnson is Preparing $3.9B for Talc Settlements

Pharmaceutical Giant Johnson & Johnson is Preparing $3.9B for Talc Settlements

Pharmaceutical giant Johnson & Johnson has set aside $3.9 billion for talc-related litigation, according to a regulatory [Read More...]
Alaska Airlines Will Pay $3.19M Following the Death of a Passenger

Alaska Airlines Will Pay $3.19M Following the Death of a Passenger

Seattle-based Alaska Airlines has been ordered to pay more than $3 million to the family of a passenger of reduced mobility w[Read More...]

#LegalNews

@@TheNTLtop100

Contact Us | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy

Attorney information and content provided on this website is provided for the benefit of members of The National Trial Lawyers and as a public service by Legal Associations Management, Inc. The website and all data are the property of Legal Associations Management, Inc. Data, including without limitation attorney information and content, on the site may not be mined, sold, or used commercially for any purpose without the explicit written consent of Legal Associations Management, Inc. This site may not be accessed by any automated program for extracting data for any use. By accessing and using the site you agree that you will not develop, support or use software, devices, scripts, robots, or any other means or processes (including crawlers, browser plug-ins and add-ons, or any other technology) to scrape data or otherwise copy profiles and other data. Unauthorized use or attempted unauthorized use of this system may subject you to both civil and criminal penalties.