Phil Bartlett v. Dr. David Coppe.

Citations

• 159 A.3d 1065
• 2017 WL 2125840
• 2017 R.I. LEXIS 57

Syllabus

The plaintiffs, Phil and Natalie Bartlett, appealed pro se from the grant of summary judgment in favor of the defendant, Dr. David Coppe, in this medical malpractice action. The Bartletts contended on appeal that it was not \fair and just\ or \equitable\ that they were not given an opportunity to \argue their factual evidence\ or \the merits of their Complaint\ in Superior Court. The Supreme Court held that summary judgment in favor of Dr. Coppe was appropriate due to the fact that expert testimony was essential to the instant medical malpractice action and the Bartletts had been precluded from relying on expert testimony by the hearing justice. Accordingly, the Supreme Court affirmed the judgment of the Superior Court.