Legal Opinion

Marcum v. Adventist Health System/West

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided September 16, 2008No. CC 040505205; CA A129660; SC S055431PublishedCited by 28 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBalmer, J.

This medical malpractice action requires us to review and apply the standards for admission of expert medical testimony. Under the applicable evidentiary rules, as interpreted in this court’s cases, an expert’s medical testimony must meet a test of “scientific validity.” Plaintiff here experienced symptoms of pain, swelling, and discoloration in her left hand immediately after injection of a chemical called gadolinium; her pain and the discoloration have continued. At trial, plaintiff proffered the testimony of a medical expert that the gadolinium, instead of going into the vein, went into an…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. State v. BrownOregon Supreme Court · 1984
  2. State v. O'KeyOregon Supreme Court · 1995
  3. State v. LyonsOregon Supreme Court · 1996
  4. Joshi v. Providence Health System of Oregon Corp.Oregon Supreme Court · 2006
  5. Jennings v. Baxter Healthcare Corp.Oregon Supreme Court · 2000

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

3Cited by28 opinions

  1. State v. SouthardOregon Supreme Court · 2009
  2. State v. LovernCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2010
  3. State v. ConsaulNew Mexico Supreme Court · 2014
  4. King v. Burlington Northern Santa Fe Ry. Co.Nebraska Supreme Court · 2009
  5. State v. OrtizOregon Supreme Court · 2024

23 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