In the case of Lewis v. Reading Hospital, No. 986 MDA 2024 (Pa. Super. Sept. 2, 2025 Bowes, J., Olson, J., and Stabile, J.) (Op. by Stabile, J.), the Pennsylvania Superior Court issued an Opinion which it reviewed the correct approach to increased risk claims in medical malpractice cases.
In this medical malpractice case, the court vacated the verdict in favor of the Plaintiff and remanded the case for a new trial.
In part, the Superior Court ruled in favor of the defense after finding that the trial court had failed to grant a mistrial after the Plaintiff’s attorney told the jury that the defense was unable to retain an expert on causation, which statement was not consistent in the evidence of the record. In this case the Plaintiff had been successful in precluding one of the defense experts from testifying at trial. The appellate court held that a party who succeeds in excluding evidence on legal grounds may not mislead a jury by telling the jury that such evidence never existed in the first place.
The Superior Court also agreed that the trial court erred in giving an instruction and a verdict form to the jury which equated the negligence element of factual cause with an “increased risk of harm” argument.
Anyone wishing to review a copy of this decision may click this LINK.
I send thanks to Attorney Michael D. Pipa of the Harrisburg, PA law firm of Saxton & Stump for bringing this case to my attention.