Writing 100 - Essay Example

Grade Witness: Lawyer Raynor warned expert not to talk of Smoking This case emanates from Rosalind Wilson heirs who sued Roxborough hospital for the death of their relative. Her heirs argue that the hospital refused to disclose Wilson’s medical condition, which caused his death.
This case testifies that one of Raynor’s witnesses was involved in a medical malpractice in 2012. The author argues that the judge barred all testimonies from witnesses that would disclose that Wilson was a long time smoker. As a result of this malpractice, the court has imposed penalties amounting to $1 million against lawyer Nancy Raynor.
Modics analyzes arguments from different witnesses, which support the fact that the deceased woman was a smoker. Raynor’s appellate lawyers, Maureen McBride and James Sargent Jr., immediately filed an emergency appeal with the Superior Court. Their appeal indicated that they had new evidence from Joe Chapman. Chapman, a witness in court, argues that he eavesdropped Raynor telling DR. John Kelly, who was the expert witness, that the court judge (Paul Panepinto) had completely banned the mention of the woman who was in trial as a smoker.
However, Kelly indicates in this article that he decided to come forward after learning about Raynor’s predicament in the inquirer. The author indicates that Chapman came forward after obtaining information from the inquirer, which indicated the sanctions that were imposed on Raynor. Joseph Chapman, supports the argument that Wilson was a smoker by indicating that he overheard Raynor talk about smoking to the doctor. Per curiam of the superior court indicated that the judges considered Chapman’s testimony. Panepinto accused Raynor of manipulating the testimony indicating that Raynor had changed her whole story.
Plaintff’s lawyer, Mathew D’Annuzo, questioned the extended periods taken by Chapman to testify. He argued that two years was a very long time. D’Anozo supports this argument by indicating that he had noted the presence of Chapman in the court room. This happened when Kelly testified that Raynor was a smoker.
Dr. John Kelly also supports the argument that the deceased woman was a smoker by indicating that she went to hospital complaining of short breath. The physicians conducted X-ray that showed a suspicious nodule. The doctors, however, failed to inform her about the nodule. The woman later died of Lung cancer. As a result of this, the author indicates that Panepinto banned any testimony that would be requested by Plaintiffs’ lawyers. Panepinto believed that the testimonies would divert the attention of the workers in the hospital from their responsibilities and they would later inform the woman of the X-ray results.
The accusations also included the closure of her firm. Chapman indicates that he decided not to be harsh on Raynor and instead ban her testimony by testifying that he was not a smoker.
Mondics also supports this argument by commenting that Chapman and other two witnesses, who were a room doctor and an insurance adjuster, testified that they overheard Raynor advising Kelly about her smoking habit. She pleaded with him to avoid talking about smoking.
This argument would have been more effective if a different type of evidence was used. For example, if Wilson heirs would have considered using the post mortem results to the Judges. The results would have clearly revealed the cause of death.
Work Cited
Mondics, Chris. “Superior Court Halts Hefty Penalty against Lawyer.” Philly News, 2015. Web. 5 Mar 2045 Read More