Justice Stanley Green
Patient Mendoza moved for summary judgment on the issue of liability against Dr. Raj in this medical malpractice suit alleging that as a result of Raj’s failure to properly perform a Laser Assisted Lipolysis (LAL), she suffered severe burns and scarring. Her expert, Dr. Brightman, affirmed the injuries Mendoza sustained were due solely to Raj’s improper performance of the LAL, finding the burns were a direct result of Raj’s deviations from accepted standards of medical care. Mendoza contended that the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur should be applied. Raj’s expert, Dr. Edwards, opined Mendoza did not suffer third degree, full thickness burns, stating the skin necrosis depicted in photographs was due to Mendoza’s poor nutrition, and lack of adequate hydration. Yet, the court stated while a medical expert need not be a specialist in a particular field, where a physician opined outside his area of expertise, a foundation must be laid tending to support the reliability of the opinion rendered. Here, it ruled Edwards failed to demonstrate the knowledge, training or expertise to render her opinion reliable. The court concluded Mendoza’s competent evidence established her claimed injuries were a direct result of Raj’s deviations, and warranted application of res ipsa doctrine, granting her motion.
