Condra v. Atlanta Orthopaedic Group

Facts

DaphyneCondra (plaintiff) sought treatment for pain from physician James Chappuis (defendant), a member of the Atlanta Orthopaedic Group (defendant). Chappuis put Condra on a regimen of the drug Tegretol. During the second round of treatment, Condra experienced shortness of breath and cramping that sent her to the hospital. She was diagnosed with aplastic anemia, a rare and serious disease. Condra and her husband sued Chappuis and Atlanta Orthopaedic in a Georgia state court, alleging that the failure to monitor Condra’s blood count was a departure from the standard of care, constituting malpractice.In a pretrial deposition, one of defendants’ expert witnesses testified that it was his own practice to monitor the blood counts of patients on Tegretol. Defendants moved in limine to prohibit the Condras from inquiring into the personal practices of defense expert witnesses. The court granted the motion. A verdict was rendered for defendants. The Condras appealed, citing the preclusion of their inquiry into the personal practices of defense experts and certain jury instructions given by the court. The appellate court affirmed, relying uponJohnson v. Riverdale Anesthesia Assocs., 563 S.E.2d 431 (Ga. 2002), as to the exclusion of the experts’ testimony. The Condras appealed.