Skip to main content
Iowa Judicial Branch
Main Content

Case No. 19-2137

William McGrew and Elaine McGrew
v.
Eromosele Otoadese, M.D. and Northern Iowa Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery Clinic, P.C.

Plaintiffs appealed from a district court judgment entered on a jury verdict in favor of defendants in plaintiffs’ medical malpractice action. Plaintiffs contended the district court erred in limiting or excluding testimony from two physicians on grounds plaintiffs had failed to adequately disclose the nature of the doctors’ opinions prior to trial, and in limiting plaintiffs’ cross-examination of defendant regarding his background and work history. The court of appeals affirmed the district court’s rulings. Plaintiffs seek further review.

County:
Black Hawk

Applicant

William McGrew and Elaine McGrew

Resisters

Eromosele Otoadese, M.D. and Northern Iowa Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery Clinic, P.C.

Attorneys for Applicant

Martin Diaz

Attorneys for Resisters

Nancy J. Penner
Jennifer E. Rinden
Vincent S. Geis

Court of Appeals

Court of Appeals Opinion

Opinion Number:
19-2137
Date Published:
Mar 03, 2021
Summary

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Kellyann M. Lekar, Judge.  AFFIRMED.  Heard by Mullins, P.J., and May and Schumacher, JJ.  Opinion by Schumacher, J.  (14 pages)

            William McGrew and his wife, Elaine McGrew, appeal the jury’s verdict for Dr. Eromosele Otoadese and Northern Iowa Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery Clinic, P.C., in their medical malpractice action.  OPINION HOLDS: Because the rules of civil procedure require the disclosure of expert opinions, we conclude the district court did not abuse its discretion by ruling a physician could only testify concerning his treatment of McGrew and not to matters arising before he began treating him.  Also, the court did not abuse its discretion by ruling another physician could not testify in the case, as he did not provide any direct treatment to McGrew.  The McGrews did not provide adequate disclosure of the nature of the doctors’ expert opinions.  We determine the court did not abuse its discretion by ruling the McGrews could not present evidence of Dr. Otoadese’s past relationships with a hospital or medical clinic, as the evidence was more prejudicial than probative.  We affirm the decision of the district court.

Other Information

Date Retained:
Jun 29, 2021
© 2022 Iowa Judicial Branch. All Rights Reserved.