From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Foster v. Smithkline Corporation

Appellate Court of Connecticut
Mar 28, 1989
556 A.2d 1064 (Conn. App. Ct. 1989)

Opinion

(6569)

Argued March 15, 1989

Decision released March 28, 1989

Action to recover damages for medical malpractice, and for other relief, brought to the Superior Court in the judicial district of Hartford-New Britain at Hartford and tried to the jury before O'Neill, J.; verdict and judgment for the defendants, from which the plaintiff appealed to this court. No error.

Alice S. Miskimin, with whom, on the brief, was Herbert Watstein, for the appellant (plaintiff).

Jackson J. O'Keefe, with whom, on the brief, was Maureen Sullivan Dinnan, for the appellee (defendant Pacifico G. Flores, Jr.).


In this malpractice action, the plaintiff appeals from the judgment rendered after the court directed a defendants' verdict. He claims the trial court erred (1) in excluding certain hospital records and medical reports, (2) in excluding testimony from the plaintiffs expert concerning causation of gynecomastia, (3) in denying the plaintiff's motion to amend his complaint, (4) in excluding from evidence an authoritive medical study used by the plaintiff's treating physician, and (5) in directing a verdict for the defendant.

The claims of error pressed by the plaintiff implicate the discretionary powers of the trial court. Our review fails to disclose any abuse of such discretion.


Summaries of

Foster v. Smithkline Corporation

Appellate Court of Connecticut
Mar 28, 1989
556 A.2d 1064 (Conn. App. Ct. 1989)
Case details for

Foster v. Smithkline Corporation

Case Details

Full title:WILLIAM H. FOSTER v. SMITHKLINE CORPORATION ET AL

Court:Appellate Court of Connecticut

Date published: Mar 28, 1989

Citations

556 A.2d 1064 (Conn. App. Ct. 1989)
556 A.2d 1064

Citing Cases

Foster v. Smithkline Corporation

Decided May 5, 1989 The plaintiff's petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 18 Conn.…