ROSENBERG BY ROSENBERG v. Cahill

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that medical doctors may be competent to testify as to standard of care required of chiropractor but only as to those matters which each discipline share in common in terms of education, licensure, and training
• noting that a medical malpractice case is \essentially no different from an ordinary negligence case\
• explaining that in ordinary medical malpractice cases, the standard of practice to which the defendant-doctor failed to adhere must be proved by expert testimony
• holding medical professionals could render standard of care opinions in overlapping fields with common education, training, and licensure
• finding juries should not be permitted to speculate, without expert testimony, in areas where lay persons are not expected to have sufficient knowledge.
• “[I]n the ordinary medical malpractice case, ‘the standard of practice to which [the defendant-practitioner] failed to adhere must be established by expert testimony____’”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).