Screening Panels Unconstitutional
On November 3, 2009, Judge Steven M. Houran granted a Motion to Exclude Screening Panel Finding filed by Reis Law on behalf of the Plaintiff in a medical negligence case. That Order in Eaton v. Fleet (Carroll County Superior Court Docket # 2008-CV-074) held to be unconstitutional a provision of the N.H. statute (RSA 519-B) that mandates that all medical negligence cases be tried before a panel of three members (a retired judge, a physician and a lawyer) in advance of a jury trial.
Judge Houran ruled that the statute which provides for the admission of unanimous Screening Panel decisions violated the Separation of Powers doctrine of Part I, Article 37 of the N.H. Constitution. That ruling in Eaton barred the defendant doctor from admitting evidence of the adverse Screening Panel findings because a legislative mandate cannot be permitted to:
“…prevent the Court from meeting its obligation to weigh the relevance and probative and prejudicial value of evidence, a core judicial function. RSA 519-B: 8, 9 and 10 impermissibly intrude upon and deprive the judiciary of its right and obligation to decide the means and methods through which the rights and duties of medical injury litigants’ claims or defenses will be protected, enforced, or prosecuted. (Order at 17).”
Although this important issue has not yet been addressed by the N.H. Supreme Court, subsequent Superior Court decisions have similarly held that portions of RSA 519-B are unconstitutional. Given the high cost of litigating such cases for injured patients, the added burden of an additional trial before another tribunal threatened to further limit the ability of those victims to seek justice. It is hoped that the N.H. Supreme Court will eventually declare RSA 519-B to be unconstitutional and entirely remove this impediment to a patient’s ability to exercise his or her rights to pursue a fundamental right.
Eaton v Fleet
Reis Law, PLLC
66 Hanover St. Suite 203
Manchester, NH 03101
Ph: 603-792-0800
On November 3, 2009, Judge Steven M. Houran granted a Motion to Exclude Screening Panel Finding filed by Reis Law on behalf of the Plaintiff in a medical negligence case. That Order in Eaton v. Fleet (Carroll County Superior Court Docket # 2008-CV-074) held to be unconstitutional a provision of the N.H. statute (RSA 519-B) that mandates that all medical negligence cases be tried before a panel of three members (a retired judge, a physician and a lawyer) in advance of a jury trial.
Judge Houran ruled that the statute which provides for the admission of unanimous Screening Panel decisions violated the Separation of Powers doctrine of Part I, Article 37 of the N.H. Constitution. That ruling in Eaton barred the defendant doctor from admitting evidence of the adverse Screening Panel findings because a legislative mandate cannot be permitted to:
“…prevent the Court from meeting its obligation to weigh the relevance and probative and prejudicial value of evidence, a core judicial function. RSA 519-B: 8, 9 and 10 impermissibly intrude upon and deprive the judiciary of its right and obligation to decide the means and methods through which the rights and duties of medical injury litigants’ claims or defenses will be protected, enforced, or prosecuted. (Order at 17).”
Although this important issue has not yet been addressed by the N.H. Supreme Court, subsequent Superior Court decisions have similarly held that portions of RSA 519-B are unconstitutional. Given the high cost of litigating such cases for injured patients, the added burden of an additional trial before another tribunal threatened to further limit the ability of those victims to seek justice. It is hoped that the N.H. Supreme Court will eventually declare RSA 519-B to be unconstitutional and entirely remove this impediment to a patient’s ability to exercise his or her rights to pursue a fundamental right.
Eaton v Fleet
Reis Law, PLLC
66 Hanover St. Suite 203
Manchester, NH 03101
Ph: 603-792-0800