Click to change text size
Medical Experts
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
MEDICAL EXPERTS - WHEN & HOW THEY HELP YOU WIN
Go to Section
I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X
IX. Opinions Relying on Records
May an expert rely on records that are not produced by him? Yes.
In Papach v. Mercy Suburban Hospital, 887 A.2d 233 (Pa. Super. 2005), the Superior
Court reviewed the law in this area. One of the issues in the case was whether the medical expert could rely, in forming her opinion, on ambulance records. The Court stated at 241-242;
There are several reasons which sanction the use of the ambulance report in this case. Initially it must be noted that it was undisputed by the parties that the plaintiff's decedent was treated at the scene of the second accident by the Plymouth Community Ambulance. The records containing the treatment of Mr. Haws were made in the regular course of business, were obtained by the defendant's use of a subpoena and were self-authenticated. Pursuant to the provisions of the Pennsylvania Rules of Evidence (901 and 902) the properly obtained ambulance records were certified as required. The self-authenticated ambulance records were therefore appropriately admitted as evidence pursuant to Pa.R.E. 803(6) ... The ambulance records were also admissible pursuant to the holding in Gunn v. Grossman, 2000 PA Super 48, 748 A.2d 1235 (Pa.Super. 2000) which states that:
It is well-settled in Pennsylvania that a medical expert is permitted to express an opinion which is based, in part, on medical records which are not in evidence, but which are customarily relied on by experts in her profession. Cohen v. Albert Einstein Medical Center, 405 Pa. Super. 392, 592 A.2d 720 (1991).] This exception to the rule against hearsay was adopted in Pennsylvania law in 1971 in Commonwealth v. Thomas, 444 Pa. 436, 282 A.2d 693 (1971), and has been applied consistently since then. See Primavera [v. Celotex Corp., 415 Pa. Super. 41, 608 A.2d 515]. [Moreover,] while the fact that a testifying expert may have based her opinion, in part, on the diagnoses and opinions of other experts may impact the weight the jury assigns to her ultimate opinion, this fact alone does not require exclusion. If the opinions expressed by other physicians are part of the type of material reasonably relied on by experts in the particular field, not only is disclosure of those opinions permissible, it is likely to be helpful to the jury in assisting it in evaluating the testifying expert's opinion. Therefore, there is no basis in reason or case law to exclude opinions or diagnosis which are reasonably and traditionally relied upon by experts. Primavera, 608 A. 2d at 523.
