ROBERTA SPENSIERI, APPELLANT, v. CHARLES W. LASKY, ET AL., RESPONDENTS.
94 N.Y.2d 231 (1999).
December 2, 1999
3 No. 177
(99 NY Int. 0168)
Decided December 2, 1999
_________________________________________________________________
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication
in the New York Reports.
_________________________________________________________________
John W. Bailey, for appellant.
Nancy E. May-Skinner, for respondents.
Medical Society of the State of New York, amicus
curiae.
WESLEY, J.:
During the course of this medical malpractice trial, the court
rejected on hearsay grounds plaintiff's attempt to introduce the
Physician's Desk Reference (PDR) into evidence to establish by itself
the standard of care for a doctor in prescribing and monitoring a
drug. We hold that the PDR as offered here constitutes hearsay and
cannot, by itself, establish the applicable standard of care for
physicians who prescribemedications for their patients.
Roberta Spensieri began taking birth control pills in 1978. In early
1986, she began experiencing irregular menstrual bleeding. In May of
that same year, Spensieri was examined by defendant Dr. John H. Streit
and was prescribed Ortho-Novum 10/11, a birth control pill containing
estrogen. The following month she was examined by defendant Dr.
Charles W. Lasky. Lasky noted that although Spensieri was taking an
oral contraceptive, she was still experiencing irregular heavy
bleeding with clots. After a physical examination, Lasky made a
diagnosis of dysfunctional uterine bleeding. He sought to increase
Spensieri's estrogen level to help stop the bleeding and instructed
her to take her birth control pill four times a day for five days and,
thereafter, once per day.
According to the PDR, oral contraceptives such as Ortho-Novum carry
with them a risk of thromboembolism leading to strokes. The PDR notes
that patients often discontinue use of oral contraceptives when they
SNIPPETS:
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the New York
During the course of this medical malpractice trial, the court rejected on hearsay grounds
We hold that the PDR as offered here constitutes hearsay and cannot, by itself, establish the
Roberta Spensieri began taking birth control pills in 1978.
The following month she was examined by defendant Dr. Charles W. Lasky.
Lasky noted that although Spensieri was taking an oral contraceptive, she was still
oral contraceptives such as Ortho-Novum carry with them a risk of thromboembolism leading to
The drug package insert for Estinyl notes that the dangers of estrogen include
The court sustained defendants" objection on hearsay grounds.
Spensieri's expert then described the risks associated with birth control pills containing
Spensieri requested the court to charge the jury that New York requires doctors to have
The Appellate Division further concluded that the trial court's refusal to give the requested
The court noted that the jury charge reviewed the parties" factual assertions and instructed
She maintains, however, that the warnings and contraindications contained in the PDR should
83 NY2d 1, 9).
of Ocean County, supra, 152 NJ 563, 580, 706 A2d 721, 729; Martin v Hacker, supra, 83 NY2d 1,
Thus, plaintiff was not prohibited from offering testimony concerning her expert's
The problem here is that the requested charge as to the standard of care in prescribing
|
