Buck v. St. Clair
Idaho Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
BISTLINE, Justice.
The issue presented on appeal is whether the trial court correctly excluded pursuant to I.C. § 6-1013 the testimony of a nationally board-certified out-of-state obstetrician-gynecologist in a medical malpractice case. We hold it was error to exclude this testimony and remand for proceedings consistent with this opinion.
The plaintiff called as a witness Dr. Anton Broms, a nationally board-certified obstetrician-gynecologist from Portland, Oregon, to testify regarding the standard of care and the defendant's negligence. The defendant objected to this witness on the basis of…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Brune v. BelinkoffMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1968
- Ardoline v. KeeganSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1954
- McGulpin v. BessmerSupreme Court of Iowa · 1950
3Cited by36 opinions
- Pearson v. ParsonsIdaho Supreme Court · 1988
- Kozlowski v. RushIdaho Supreme Court · 1992
- McDaniel v. Inland Northwest Renal Care Group-Idaho, LLCIdaho Supreme Court · 2007
- Leazer v. KieferIdaho Supreme Court · 1991
- Grimes v. GreenIdaho Supreme Court · 1987
31 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.