This past February, the Supreme Court advanced our understanding of the nettlesome Connecticut General Statutes § 52-190a, which requires plaintiffs in medical malpractice cases to obtain a “good faith” written statement from a health care provider of the same specialty as the defendant. This decision, together with the Appellate Court’s work on the same subject, went a considerable distance toward much needed clarification.
Other decisions of note from the high court in the area of medical malpractice related to evidentiary issues (inferences and inflammatory remarks), an exegesis on the difference between claims of medical malpractice and lack of informed consent, and a review of the law of juror misconduct.
