Legal Opinion

Gbur v. Golio

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided January 28, 2009No. 23 WAP 2008PublishedCited by 20 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION ANNOUNCING THE JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

Justice SAYLOR.

We allowed appeal to address the MCARE Act’s samesubspecialty requirement pertaining to the admission of expert testimony to establish the standard of care in a medical malpractice action. Although the Court is unanimous as to the result, it is equally divided concerning the appropriate reasoning. This opinion, supported by three of six participating Justices, turns on issue preservation.

Appellant is a physician specializing in the field of urology. He is certified by the American Board of Urology. In 2001 through 2002, Appellant…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Dilliplaine v. Lehigh Valley Trust Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1974
  2. E. J. McAleer & Co. v. Iceland Products, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1977
  3. Takes v. Metropolitan Edison Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1997
  4. Herbert v. Parkview HospitalSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2004
  5. Wexler v. HechtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2007

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. ASC Utah, Inc. v. Wolf Mountain Resorts, L.C.Utah Supreme Court · 2013
  2. Crespo, A. v. Hughes, W.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2017
  3. Renna v. SchadtSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2013
  4. Vicari v. SpiegelSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2010
  5. Anderson v. McAfoosSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2012

15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API