Neurosurgeon’s Expert Opinions in Trial Against a Certified Registered Nurse Anesthetist Were Admissible as Plaintiff Opened the Door on Cross Examination and Evidence Rule 601 Did Not Apply.

The plaintiff brought an action against a certified registered nurse 
anesthetist (CRNA), alleging she was negligent in hyperextending her neck during the induction of anesthesia during a laminotomy. The defense expert was a neurologist who testified on direct regarding causation. 

The plaintiff appealed the defense verdict, seeking a new trial on the basis that the neurosurgeon was not qualified to render opinions on anesthesiology under Evidence Rule 601. The Appellate Court found no abuse of discretion or error by the trial court in allowing the CRNA’s expert witness to testify. Evidence Rule 601 did not apply because: (1) this was a claim against a CRNA, not a physician, podiatrist or hospital; and (2) the witness was called to testify as to causation, not liability. The neurosurgeon did testify as to liability on cross-examination, but the Invited Error Rule precluded the plaintiff from appealing his liability testimony on cross since it was the plaintiff who directed the expert to read portions of his report on cross-examination that were not discussed in direct.

_{Case Law Alerts, 1st Quarter, January 2024 is prepared by Marshall Dennehey to provide information on recent developments of interest to our readers. This publication is not intended to provide legal advice for a specific situation or to create an attorney-client relationship. Copyright © 2024 Marshall Dennehey, all rights reserved. This article may not be reprinted without the express written permission of our firm.}