Case ID: conn-app_18/html/0133-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Per Curiam.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

William H. Foster v. Smithkline Corporation et al.
    (6569)
    Spallone, O’Connell and Foti, Js.
    Argued March 15
    decision released March 28, 1989
    
      Alice S. Miskimin, with whom, on the brief, was Herbert Watstein, for the appellant (plaintiff).
    
      Jackson J. O’Keefe, with whom, on the brief, was Maureen Sullivan Dinnan, for the appellee (defendant Pacifico G. Flores, Jr.).
   Per Curiam.

In this malpractice action, the plaintiff appeals from the judgment rendered after the court directed a defendants’ verdict. He claims the trial court erred (1) in excluding certain hospital records and medical reports, (2) in excluding testimony from the plaintiffs expert concerning causation of gynecomastia, (3) in denying the plaintiffs motion to amend his complaint, (4) in excluding from evidence an authoritive medical study used by the plaintiff’s treating physician, and (5) in directing a verdict for the defendant.

The claims of error pressed by the plaintiff implicate the discretionary powers of the trial court. Our review fails to disclose any abuse of such discretion.

There is no error.