Proof of community standard of health care practice in malpractice case.
In any case, claim or action for damages due to injury to or death of any person, brought against any physician and surgeon or other provider of health care, including, without limitation, any dentist, physicians’ assistant, nurse practitioner, registered nurse, licensed practical nurse, nurse anesthetist, medical technologist, physical therapist, hospital or nursing home, or any person vicariously liable for the negligence of them or any of them, on account of the provision of or failure to provide health care or on account of any matter incidental or related thereto, such claimant or plaintiff must, as an essential part of his or her case in chief, affirmatively prove by direct expert testimony and by a preponderance of all the competent evidence, that such defendant then and there negligently failed to meet the applicable standard of health care practice of the community in which such care allegedly was or should have been provided, as such standard existed at the time and place of the alleged negligence of such physician and surgeon, hospital or other such health care provider and as such standard then and there existed with respect to the class of health care provider that such defendant then and there belonged to and in which capacity he, she or it was functioning. Such individual providers of health care shall be judged in such cases in comparison with similarly trained and qualified providers of the same class in the same community, taking into account his or her training, experience, and fields of medical specialization, if any. If there be no other like provider in the community and the standard of practice is therefore indeterminable, evidence of such standard in similar Idaho communities at said time may be considered. As used in this act, the term "community" refers to that geographical area ordinarily served by the licensed general hospital at or nearest to which such care was or allegedly should have been provided.
Notes of Decisions
Ballard v. Kerr, M.D, Silk Touch Laser, 378 P.3d 464 (Idaho 2016).
· cites it 120× “3d 627, 632 (2014) (quoting I.C. § 6-1012). “The defendant’s care is judged against ‘similarly trained and qualified providers of the same class in the same community, taking into account his or her training, experience, and fields of medical specialization, if any.”
Dulaney v. St. Alphonsus Reg'l Med. Ctr., 45 P.3d 816 (Idaho 2002).
· cites it 56× “The applicable community standard of care is defined in Idaho Code § 6-1012 . It is: (a) the standard of care for the class of health care provider to which the defendant belonged and was functioning, taking into account the defendant's training, experience, and fields of…”
Leazer v. Kiefer, 821 P.2d 957 (Idaho 1991).
· cites it 78× “Idaho Code § 6-1012 states: 6-1012. Proof of community standard of health care practice in malpractice case.”
Jones v. Crawforth, 205 P.3d 660 (Idaho 2009).
· cites it 46× “§ 6-1012, B & B focuses on the district court’s statement that Kurtz “does fall within the definition of a medical technologist as contained in Idaho Code 6-1012.” While Kurtz may not be considered a medical technologist, this fact is irrelevant.”
Kolln v. Saint Luke's Reg'l Med. Ctr., 940 P.2d 1142 (Idaho 1997).
· cites it 42× “Further, the court found that in light of I.C. § 6-1012's requirement of direct expert testimony, *1149 Kolln's testimony was insufficient in and of itself to prevent summary judgment.”
Buck v. St. Clair, 702 P.2d 781 (Idaho 1985).
· cites it 52× “In so doing, we are cognizant of the intent and purpose of the passage of I.C. §§ 6-1012 and 6-1013. Section 6-1012 addresses the proof of community standard of health care practice in malpractice cases, and provides in part: Such individual providers of health care shall be…”
Morris by & Through Morris v. Thomson, 937 P.2d 1212 (Idaho 1997).
· cites it 48× “Morris argues that this is contrary to both statutes and case law which establish that plaintiffs may call non-local, and even out-of-state, experts to testify to the standard of care.”
Eldridge v. West, 458 P.3d 172 (Idaho 2020).
· cites it 25× “I.C. § 6-1012 (italics added). Title 6, Chapter 10 of the Idaho Code is entitled, “Medical Malpractice.”
Gubler v. Boe, 815 P.2d 1034 (Idaho 1991).
· cites it 52× “such claimant or plaintiff must, as an essential part of his or her case in chief, affirmatively prove by direct expert testimony and by preponderance of all competent evidence, that such defendant then and there failed to meet the applicable standard of health care practice of…”
Hayward v. Valley Vista Care Corp., 33 P.3d 816 (Idaho 2001).
· cites it 30× “Idaho Code § 6-1012 provides in relevant part: In any case, claim or action for damages due to injury to or death of any person, brought against any physician and surgeon or other provider of health care, including, without limitation, any dentist, .”
Pearson v. Parsons, 757 P.2d 197 (Idaho 1988).
· cites it 36× “We conclude that plaintiff is not required to do so, if the expert testimony presented by plaintiff complies with the requirements contained in I.C. §§ 6-1012 and 6-1013. We reverse the summary judgment of the trial court.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.