Harward v. Urology Clinic of Utah
Harward v. Urology Clinic of Utah, 2023 UT App 63 (Christiansen Forster, J.)
The Harwards sued Dr. Reynolds and the IHC infusion center for medical malpractice after Ms. Harward suffered permanent vestibular damage. The Harwards settled their claims against IHC before trial. The jury found that Dr. Reynolds did not breach his standard of care. On appeal, the Utah Court of Appeals vacated the jury’s verdict and remanded, holding:
- The district court abused its discretion in instructing the jury on general consent, because consent did not apply to the case and because the defense characterized the acknowledgement form as a “consent form.”
- The district court did not err in permitting the physician experts to testify regarding the nursing standard of care.
- Judicial Tip: Experts should not opine on the allocation of fault.