12-12-07 A-1027-06T1
In this medical malpractice case, we held that: 1) a res
ipsa loquitur charge was not required because, even though
plaintiff's experts testified that the medical community
recognizes that an injury of the sort sustained by plaintiff
would not have occurred in the absence of negligence, the
experts' opinions were not supported by reference to any medical
text or the experts' own experience; and 2) a mistrial was not
required because the judge took appropriate curative measures to
address trial testimony by defendant that differed from
testimony that defendant had given in his deposition.
Judge Winkelstein has filed a dissenting opinion in which
he concludes that the judge erred by failing to instruct the
jury on res ispa loquitur.
