The Nebraska Supreme Court has ruled that plaintiffs could not argue that a surgeon should have disclosed his displinary history unless there was proof that the standard of care required disclosure.
The Court held that plaintiffs “never established that the standard of care required such disclosures. Rather, they ask us to adopt a different standard of care for a narrow class of plaintiffs. Not only is their approach unprecedented, it contravenes the Legislature’s adoption of the professional theory by supplanting, in a single narrow context, the Legislature’s judgment.”
The Court also held that the evidence was not admissible to impeach the defendant.
The case is Curran v. Buser, No. S-04-1303 (Neb, S. Ct. March 31, 2006). Read the opinion here.