Joan Vecchio v. Women & Infants Hospital

Syllabus

On review by way of certiorari, the petitioner, Joan Vecchio, challenged a Superior Court order granting the respondent's, Women & Infants Hospital, motion for a protective order limiting the deposition testimony of Vecchio's expert witness, David Brewster, M.D., to causation opinions and prohibiting Vecchio from further supplementing Dr. Brewster's disclosure to include other opinions. Before this Court, Vecchio contended that the Superior Court order should be overturned, arguing that: (1) the supplemental disclosure of Dr. Brewster was the product of trial preparation and in compliance with the Superior Court Rules of Civil Procedure (2) the supplemental disclosure was not made on the eve of trial, and, thus, W&I Hospital had sufficient opportunity to reschedule Dr. Brewster's deposition and (3) prohibiting Vecchio from supplementing her expert disclosures would be drastic and inequitable, and will hinder her right to a fair trial.<br><br>The Supreme Court concluded that the trial justice abused her discretion in granting W&I Hospital's motion and prohibiting Vecchio from supplementing Dr. Brewster's testimony to include opinions on the postoperative standard of care, reasoning that the record made clear that Vecchio had made every attempt to comply with the Superior Court's scheduling orders regarding discovery and expert disclosures. Moreover, the Supreme Court noted that counsel for Vecchio notified opposing counsel promptly after learning from Dr. Brewster that he intended to opine on the postoperative standard of care. Finally, the Supreme Court concluded that this was clearly not a case in which Vecchio grossly or repeatedly deviated from the Superior Court's scheduling orders or Rules of Civil Procedure, and that W&I Hospital would not be prejudiced in any way by Vecchio supplementing Dr. Brewster's disclosure. Accordingly, the Supreme Court quashed the order of the Superior Court.<br>