A new Arizona Supreme Court ruling upholds a state law that seeks to screen out flimsy medical-malpractice suits by requiring that plaintiffs have a testifying witness from the same medical specialty as the doctor being sued.
The court’s unanimous ruling issued Tuesday says the requirement makes it more difficult to file medical-malpractice suits but is not unconstitutional because the requirement doesn’t flatly prevent plaintiffs from having their day in court.
The ruling was issued in a case from Tucson in which a University Physicians Healthcare doctor was sued. The doctor was sued by the father of a 17-year-old girl who died from blood clots after being hospitalized for other blood clots.
The Supreme Court’s ruling sends the case back down to trial court for further proceedings.
Topics Lawsuits
Was this article valuable?
Here are more articles you may enjoy.
Viewpoint: California’s Surplus Lines HO Market Driven by Access, Not Wildfire Risk 
A Little Behind Schedule, But Execs Say Sypher Insurance is on Track for May Debut 
Viewpoint: How Will the Middle East War Affect the Insurance Sector? 
More Insurance M&A Deals on the Horizon? 
