Patterson v. Wayne County et al

Filing 70

ORDER granting in part TO SUBSTITUTE DR. GEORGE WILSON AS DEFENDANTS MEDICAL EXPERT AT TRIAL re 66 Motion to Amend/Correct. Signed by District Judge Paul D Borman. (DGoo)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION DOUGLAS PATTERSON, Plaintiff, v. COUNTY OF WAYNE, WAYNE COUNTY DEPUTY SHERIFFS MICHAEL WINFREY, AARON MEDLEY, KENNETH TOTH, RUSSELL HERR, Individually and in Their Official Capacities, Defendants. ___________________________________ / ORDER GRANTING IN PART DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO AMEND PRETRIAL ORDER TO SUBSTITUTE DR. GEORGE WILSON AS DEFENDANT'S MEDICAL EXPERT AT TRIAL Now before the Court is Defendants' Motion to Amend Pretrial Order to Substitute Dr. George Wilson as Defendants' Medical Expert at Trial. (Dkt. No.58). Having considered Defendants' Motion, the Court GRANTS IN PART the Motion to the extent that it specifically limits Dr. Wilson's anticipated testimony to his treatment of Plaintiff and Plaintiff's medical records while he was an inmate at the Wayne County Jail. More specifically, like Plaintiff's expected medical witnesses, Dr. Wilson may testify about his diagnosis and treatment of Plaintiff's condition. He may not render expert opinions outside the scope of his diagnosis and treatment as reflected in the medical records. See Fielden v. CSX Transportation, Inc., 482 F.3d 866, 870-71 (6th Cir. 2007). But where causation testimony is based on facts within the scope of Plaintiff's treatment, such testimony will be permitted. Id. 1 Civil Case Number: 05-CV-71528 PAUL D. BORMAN UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SO ORDERED. S/Paul D. Borman PAUL D. BORMAN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Dated: August 28, 2009 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE Copies of this Order were served on the attorneys of record by electronic means or U.S. Mail on August 28, 2009. S/Denise Goodine Case Manager 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?