Justia Idaho Supreme Court Opinion Summaries

Plaintiff-Appellants Franz and Betty Suhadolnik appealed the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of their doctor, Defendant-Respondent Scott Pressman. Mr. Suhadolnik argued that his cataract surgeon, Dr. Pressman, failed to adequately inquire about his prior use of a prescription drug that resulted in increased risks during surgery. Mr. Suhadolnik presented expert testimony to demonstrate that Dr. Pressman was negligent when he performed the surgery. The district court determined that Mr. Suhadolnik’s expert failed to address any knowledge of the local standard of care, which was necessary to avoid having the testimony stricken from the trial record. Mr. Suhadolnik appealed to the Supreme Court arguing that the district court erred by dismissing his expert’s testimony. The Supreme Court found that the district court acted within its discretion in holding the expert’s testimony to be inadmissible. Accordingly the Court affirmed the lower court’s holding. View "Suhadolnik v. Pressman" on Justia Law

Defendants Milt and Mary Erhart owned a commercial building in Meridian that contained offices that they rented to various lessees. The building had external stairs that consisted of carpet-covered, wooden steps from a ground level landing to the second floor. Mr. Erhart determined that rot made the steps a hazard, and he replaced them with concrete steps in October 2003. Plaintiff Jim Phillips had an office on the second floor. In 2006, Mr. Phillips walked down the stairs to take out the trash when he tripped. He was found lying face-down on the concrete landing at the bottom of the stairs. He suffered various injuries including a closed head injury that caused permanent brain damage and a loss of memory. The Phillipses filed suit against the Erharts in 2007 to recover damages resulting from the fall. A jury returned a verdict for over $1.5 million, finding Mr. Erhart solely at fault for the accident. The Erharts filed motions for a judgment notwithstanding the verdict, for a new trial, and for a remittitur. The district court granted only the remittitur, ordering a new trial unless the Phillipses accepted a reduction in economic damages. The Phillipses accepted the reduction, and the Erharts timely appealed. On appeal to the Supreme Court, the Erharts challenged the sufficiency of the evidence to support finding Mr. Erhart solely at fault for the accident. The Supreme Court found the evidence presented at trial supported the decision of the court and the damages awarded in the case. The Court affirmed the decision of the district court. View "Phillips v. Erhart" on Justia Law

Plaintiffs-Appellants James and Lori Mareci brought suit on behalf of their minor son Tristen against Defendant-Respondent Coer D'Alene School District and Defendants Scott and Stevie Kamara. Tristen was injured at school by his classmate Quinton Kamara. On the School District's motion for summary judgment, the Marecis' claims against it were dismissed, and the Marecis appealed. The Marecis' asserted that the School District's staff members were reckless, wanton and willful in how they treated their visibly injured son, and negligent in their supervision of Quinton, who was in their custody. State law limits the liability of a school district when a claim arises out of an injury caused by a person under its supervision, custody or care. On review, the Supreme Court agreed with the lower court's finding insufficient evidence to establish the school district's liability under state law, and affirmed the lower court's decision. View "Mareci v. Coeur D'Alene Sch. Dist." on Justia Law