New Hampshire Revised Statutes 507-C:2 – Burden of Proof
Current as of: 2023 | Check for updates
|
Other versions
I. In any action for medical injury, the plaintiff shall have the burden of proving by affirmative evidence consisting of the expert testimony of a competent witness or witnesses:
(a) The standard of acceptable professional practice in the medical care provider‘s profession or specialty thereof, if any, at the time the medical care in question was rendered; and
(b) That the medical care provider failed to act in accordance with such standard; and
(c) That as a proximate result thereof, the injured person suffered injuries which would not otherwise have occurred.
II. Without limiting the applicability of paragraph I of this section, where the plaintiff claims that a medical care provider failed to supply adequate information to obtain the informed consent of the injured person:
(a) The plaintiff shall have the burden of proving by affirmative evidence, consisting of expert testimony of a competent witness or witnesses, that the treatment, procedure or surgery was performed in other than an emergency situation and that the medical care provider did not supply that type of information regarding the treatment, procedure or surgery as would customarily have been given to a patient in the position of the injured person or other persons authorized to give consent for such a patient by other medical care providers with similar training and experience at the time of the treatment, procedure or surgery.
(b) In determining whether the plaintiff has satisfied the requirements of subparagraph (a) of this paragraph, the following matters shall also be considered as material issues:
(1) Whether a person of ordinary intelligence and awareness in a position similar to that of the injured person or person giving consent on his behalf could reasonably be expected to know of the risks or hazards inherent in such treatment, procedure or surgery;
(2) Whether the injured person or the person giving consent on his behalf knew of the risks or hazard inherent in such treatment, procedure or surgery;
(3) Whether the injured party would have undergone the treatment, procedure or surgery regardless of the risk involved or whether he did not wish to be informed thereof;
(4) Whether it was reasonable for the medical care provider to limit disclosure of information because such disclosure could be expected to adversely and substantially affect the injured person’s condition.
III. In any action for medical injury, the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur shall not apply.
(a) The standard of acceptable professional practice in the medical care provider‘s profession or specialty thereof, if any, at the time the medical care in question was rendered; and
Terms Used In New Hampshire Revised Statutes 507-C:2
- Action for medical injury: means any action against a medical care provider, whether based in tort, contract or otherwise, to recover damages on account of medical injury. See New Hampshire Revised Statutes 507-C:1
- Evidence: Information presented in testimony or in documents that is used to persuade the fact finder (judge or jury) to decide the case for one side or the other.
- following: when used by way of reference to any section of these laws, shall mean the section next preceding or following that in which such reference is made, unless some other is expressly designated. See New Hampshire Revised Statutes 21:13
- injury: means any adverse, untoward or undesired consequences arising out of or sustained in the course of professional services rendered by a medical care provider, whether resulting from negligence, error or omission in the performance of such services; from rendition of such services without informed consent or in breach of warranty or in violation of contract; from failure to diagnose; from premature abandonment of a patient or of a course of treatment; from failure properly to maintain equipment or appliances necessary to the rendition of such services; or otherwise arising out of or sustained in the course of such services. See New Hampshire Revised Statutes 507-C:1
- Medical care provider: means a physician, physician's assistant, registered or licensed practical nurse, hospital, clinic or not-for-profit home health care agency licensed by the state or otherwise lawfully providing medical care or services, or an officer, employee or agent thereof acting in the course and scope of employment. See New Hampshire Revised Statutes 507-C:1
- person: may extend and be applied to bodies corporate and politic as well as to individuals. See New Hampshire Revised Statutes 21:9
- Plaintiff: The person who files the complaint in a civil lawsuit.
- Testimony: Evidence presented orally by witnesses during trials or before grand juries.
(b) That the medical care provider failed to act in accordance with such standard; and
(c) That as a proximate result thereof, the injured person suffered injuries which would not otherwise have occurred.
II. Without limiting the applicability of paragraph I of this section, where the plaintiff claims that a medical care provider failed to supply adequate information to obtain the informed consent of the injured person:
(a) The plaintiff shall have the burden of proving by affirmative evidence, consisting of expert testimony of a competent witness or witnesses, that the treatment, procedure or surgery was performed in other than an emergency situation and that the medical care provider did not supply that type of information regarding the treatment, procedure or surgery as would customarily have been given to a patient in the position of the injured person or other persons authorized to give consent for such a patient by other medical care providers with similar training and experience at the time of the treatment, procedure or surgery.
(b) In determining whether the plaintiff has satisfied the requirements of subparagraph (a) of this paragraph, the following matters shall also be considered as material issues:
(1) Whether a person of ordinary intelligence and awareness in a position similar to that of the injured person or person giving consent on his behalf could reasonably be expected to know of the risks or hazards inherent in such treatment, procedure or surgery;
(2) Whether the injured person or the person giving consent on his behalf knew of the risks or hazard inherent in such treatment, procedure or surgery;
(3) Whether the injured party would have undergone the treatment, procedure or surgery regardless of the risk involved or whether he did not wish to be informed thereof;
(4) Whether it was reasonable for the medical care provider to limit disclosure of information because such disclosure could be expected to adversely and substantially affect the injured person’s condition.
III. In any action for medical injury, the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur shall not apply.