Belfiore-Braman

Belfiore-Braman v. Rotenberg

Good Law
235 Cal. Rptr. 3d 629·25 Cal. App. 5th 234
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 26, 2018D072015California6,068 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Huffman, J.

*631 *236 Plaintiffs and appellants Angela Belfiore-Braman and Stephen Braman (sometimes together Plaintiff) appeal a defense judgment entered on a jury verdict, in their medical malpractice action against defendant and respondent D. Daniel Rotenberg, M.D. (Defendant), an orthopedic surgeon. The jury found Defendant was not negligent in the care and treatment of Ms. Belfiore-Braman during the hip replacement surgery he performed on her, and accordingly, it did not answer the special verdict's question on whether such negligence was a substantial factor in causing injury to her, or loss of consortium to her husband and fellow plaintiff.

*237 The issues on appeal center around the trial court's ruling in limine, after a hearing under Evidence Code 1 section 402, that excluded certain medical opinion testimony Plaintiff offered on issues of causation and damage, from her recently designated nonretained expert witness Dr. Aaron G. Filler, M.D., Ph.D. ("Dr. Filler"). The court determined that the proposed testimony would be unduly duplicative within the meaning of section 723 (allowing the court to limit the number of expert witnesses to be called by any party). Instead, the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.