LAKELAND, Fla. (Legal Newsline) – A jury was improperly instructed on how to return a medical malpractice verdict, a Florida appeals court has ruled.
The Second District ruled July 17 that jurors weren’t given the opportunity to return separate verdicts on two issues. The appellant, plaintiff Betty Jean Haynes, was upset the verdict form grouped the two issues together.
“Requiring the jury to answer either yes or no to this single question precluded it from finding that Haynes had proved her claim for general malpractice but not her claim for an unnecessary diagnostic test or vice versa,” Judge Craig Villanti wrote.
“In essence, Haynes’ two independent claims were improperly merged into one all-or-nothing verdict.”
The ruling opens the door to a new trial against Dr. William Blackshear, with whom the jury sided. The vascular surgeon was accused of ordering unnecessary diagnostic tests to determine the cause of Haynes’ high blood pressure.
Complications from one of the tests left Haynes with only one functioning kidney. She sued over both the tests and the complications.
The trial judge informed the jury that Haynes had two independent claims but the verdict sheet didn’t comply with that, the ruling states.
The verdict sheet asked: Was there negligence on the part of Defendant, WILLIAM BLACKSHEAR, MD and did WILLIAM BLACKSHEAR, MD order unnecessary diagnostic tests, which were not reasonably calculated to assist the health care provider in arriving at a diagnosis and treatment of BETTY JEAN HAYNES' medical condition, which were a legal cause of injury or damage to Plaintiff, BETTY JEAN HAYNES?