Vergie W. Fields

Summary

The court held that the appeal was timely because the plaintiff's written post-trial motion was properly treated as an initial motion for reconsideration that tolled the appeal period. It agreed that the trial court improperly excluded testimony explaining the plaintiff's expert's lack of board certification and improperly barred use of an authoritative medical treatise, but found neither error prejudicial because the plaintiff presented substantial, cumulative expert evidence and did not show a reasonable probability that the verdict was affected. The jury's verdict for the physician was therefore affirmed.