Pennsylvania Superior Court Affirms Dismissal of Medical Negligence Claims Due to Insufficient Evidence

The Pennsylvania Superior Court upheld the dismissal of a medical negligence claim against a physician, finding that the plaintiff failed to present sufficient evidence to establish a prima facie case. The plaintiff’s expert’s report mentioned the physician only in her supervisory role and lacked substantive allegations of direct negligence. With no evidence produced during discovery to support claims against the physician, the trial court granted summary judgment. As a result, the plaintiff’s claims against the hospital defendants, which relied on a theory of ostensible agency, also failed, as they were contingent on the physician’s alleged negligence.

The plaintiff submitted an expert report which only identified the defendant physician by name once and referred to her solely in her capacity as a supervisor of other medical providers working for the hospital defendants. 

However, the plaintiff’s claim that the physician failed to properly oversee the other physicians under her responsibility as the director was dismissed via preliminary objection. Additionally, the plaintiff failed to identify any evidence produced during discovery that would support his allegations that would impute culpability to the defendant physician. 

The Pennsylvania Superior Court granted no relief because the plaintiff provided insufficient evidence of facts to make out a prima facie case.

As to the hospital defendants, the Superior Court recognized that the claims resting upon a theory of ostensible agency could not succeed without a surviving claim of negligence against the defendant physician. Effectively, the plaintiff’s claims against the hospital defendants failed at the time the trial court granted the defendant physician’s motion for summary judgment. 

_{Case Law Alerts, 2nd Quarter, April 2025 is prepared by Marshall Dennehey to provide information on recent developments of interest to our readers. This publication is not intended to provide legal advice for a specific situation or to create an attorney-client relationship. Copyright © 2024 Marshall Dennehey, all rights reserved. This article may not be reprinted without the express written permission of our firm.}