This matter arises out of a medical malpractice action filed by Plaintiffs Tyler Grenier, individually, and Jenna Grenier, individually and as next friend of J.A.G., a minor, (collectively “Plaintiffs”) against Defendant United States of America (“Defendant”) for alleged medical negligence at Tripler Army Medical Center (“Tripler”) related to the medical care by Defendant’s employees for prenatal care and labor of Plaintiff Jenna Grenier (“Jenna”), and the subsequent delivery of J.A.G.
Severe physical injuries sustained by Jenna Grenier and J.A.G. are alleged as well as the negligent infliction of emotional distress to Plaintiff Tyler Grenier (“Tyler”) and Jenna; Plaintiffs’ loss of filial consortium; and Tyler’s loss of spousal consortium.
Defendant filed a motion to exclude the expert report and testimony of Plaintiffs’ expert witness, Jeri Morris, Ph.D., because she is not qualified to render opinions regarding the cause of the Minor Plaintiff’s brain injury and the applicable standard of care, and because her opinions are unreliable.
Neuropsychology Expert Witness
Jeri Morris has been in clinical practice for nearly 30 years, focusing on evaluating and treating those with neurological disorders and disabilities. She has been extensively involved in studying issues related to brain injury, PTSD, cognitive rehabilitation, and other areas of neuropsychology. Her work extends to training students of psychology, and being in a continuous state of study herself – regularly involved in research, publishing for peer-reviewed journals, and increasing her knowledge in this rapidly evolving field of science.
Discussion by the Court
Morris provided a neuropsychological evaluation in her expert report. In her report, she stated the medical records that she reviewed, her interviews with Jenna and Tyler, the tests administered, the results of standardized testing, her observations of the Minor Plaintiff, and her impressions. Defendant did not dispute Morris’s qualifications as a neuropsychologist, nor does it raise an objection as to the tests she administered. Defendant objected to Morris giving opinions as to causation and standard of care rendered to the Minor Plaintiff. Plaintiffs affirmatively represented that Morris is not an expert witness who will render expert opinions as to the cause or causes of the Minor Plaintiff’s injuries nor regarding the standard of care of the medical practitioners involved in the birth and care of the Minor Plaintiff.
The Court did not permit Morris to give opinion testimony about causation and standard of care but allowed her to testify about the tests she administered to the Minor Plaintiff, and the results of those tests.
Morris provided her “impressions” and included a widely sweeping comment about the Minor Plaintiff’s future care: “Given the extensive nature of his impairments and his current profile, he can be expected to have significant cognitive, social, and other deficits and require assistance and the close availability of supervision by a trained caregiver throughout his lifetime on a 24-hour basis.”
The Court held that this statement regarding the Minor Plaintiff’s limitations and future care is not supported by identifiable principles and methodology and therefore did not meet the requirements of Rule 702.
Held
The Court limited the testimony of Plaintiff’s expert Jeri Morris.
Key Takeaway:
The Court excluded Morris’ opinions on causation and standard of care because she is not qualified to render opinions in these areas, and as to her opinion on future care because she failed to provide a basis for the opinion. Morris, however, is permitted to testify about the tests that she administered to the Minor Plaintiff and the test results.
Please refer to the blogs previously published about this article:
Case Details:
| Case Caption: | Grenier Et Al V. United States Of America |
| Docket Number: | 1:22cv396 |
| Court: | United States District Court for the District of Hawaii |
| Order Date: | September 11, 2024 |
Leave a Reply