Motion in Limine • Risks and Complications • Standard of Care • Relevance • Jury Confusion
Mitchell v. Shikora, PICS Case No. 17-0806 (Pa. Super. May 5, 2017) Musmanno, J. (12 pages).
Trial court erred in denying appellant’s motion in limine and allowing evidence of “known risks and complications” in appellant’s medical negligence action because evidence of the risks and complications of a surgical procedure were irrelevant in determining whether the doctor acted within the applicable standard of care and the evidence was likely to mislead or confuse the jury. Reversed.
