Case: Vickie S. Young v. Frist Cardiology PLLC, et al
Facts: In this interlocutory appeal, Defendants moved to exclude medical opinion testimony of Plaintiff’s expert physician, averring that he does not satisfy the competency requirements of TCA 29-26-115(b) because he was not licensed to practice medicine in Tennessee or a contiguous state during the year preceding the injury. The trial court denied the motion, noting that the doctor was statutorily exempt from medical licensure while he was attending an electrophysiology fellowship program, and the statutory requirement is only applicable if the health care professional practices in a “health care profession requiring licensure.”
Appellate Decision: The intermediate court declined to accept interlocutory review.
Review Granted: May 16, 2019.
Prediction: Ben thinks the Supreme Court is likely to reverse. While the doctor’s particular job may not have required licensure, the medical “profession” in which he practiced does. David agrees.