1 18 Del. C. § 6853 (d).

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

IN AND FOR N EW CASTLE COUN TY ROGER K. G

ARBER, ) ) Plaintiff, ) C.A. No.: N14C-04-065 FSS ) v. ) ) TRIAL BY JURY DEMANDED CHRISTIANA CARE HEALTH ) SERVICES, INC., a/k/a CHRISTIANA ) CARE HEAL TH SYSTEM, INC., IPC ) THE HOSPITALIST COMPANY, INC./ ) IPC-HOSPITALISTS OF DELAWARE, ) INFECTIOU S DISEASE A SSOCIATES, ) P.A., BIKAS H BOSE , M.D. and ) NEUROSURGERY CONSULTANTS, P.A., ) ) Defenda nts. )

Submi tted: June 1 3, 2014 Decided : June 18, 2 014

ORDER Upon Re view of the Affidavits of Me rit

Plaintiff submit ted f ive affidavits of merit accom panying his medical negligence compl aint. D efendants have eac h move d to have the cou rt r evi ew t hem, in camera , to determine whether they c omply

with 18 Del. C. § 6853(a)(1) and (c). 12 Id. § 6853 (a)(1). 3 Id. § 6853 (c). 4 Id. § 6853 (c). 5 Dishmon v. Fucci , 32 A.3d 338, 342 (Del. 2011). 6 Id. at 342-343. 2

In Delaware, a health care neglig ence lawsui t must be filed wi th a n affidavi t of

merit, si gned by an exp ert an d acco mpanied by the ex pert’s curriculum vitae

. 2 The expe rt mu st be licen sed to prac tice as of the af fidav it’s date and engaged in the sam e or

simil ar field

as Defendant in the three y ears im media tely pr eceding the allegednegligent a ct. 3 Th e aff idavit m ust state th at reason able ground s exist to believe Defendant was negligent in a way that p roxi mately cau sed Pl aint iff’s inju ry. 4 The st atut e’s requirements are purposefully minimal. “In order

to satisfy the prima facie burden, a

n Affida vit of Merit must on ly

contain an expert’s sworn statement that medical neglige nce occurr ed, along with conf irma tion that heor she is qua

lified to proffer a medical opini on.” 5 An affi davit of m erit that tracks the

statutory language complies with the statute. 6

Plain tiff’s five aff

idavits each add

ress a specific Defendant. After in

camera review, the court f inds: 1. An exper

t witness h as signed e ach affi davit; 2. A current curriculum vitaewas file d with eac h affidav it; 3. Atth e ti me each affidavit was sworn, each expert was a licensed physician or nurse w

ho treate d patients a

nd/or taught in the

same3 or simil ar field

of me dicine as t

he respec tive Def

endant within the three y ears pre ceding the alleged ne gligent ac ts; 4. Eachexpert w as Boa rd certifi ed in the sa

me or simil ar field

of medic ine as the r

espective Defenda nt; 5. The affidavits state, with reasonable medical probab il ity, that there are grounds to believe each Defendant breached its standard of care; 6. Eachexpert further opines that the respective Defendant’s breach proxim ately

caused Pl aintiff’ s injurie s. Following

Defendants’ m otions, Plaintiff r espon ded. Pl aint iff’s responses are unnec essary and are no t called f

or by t he statute . They

have no bea

ring on this order.

Considerin g the above, the court f inds the af

fidavit of mer it, as to each Defenda nt, com plies with 18 Del. C. § 6853(a) (1) and (c). IT IS SO ORDERED

.

/s/ Fred S . Silver man Judge

cc: Prothonota

ry (C ivil) Dennis D. Ferri, Esquire Courtney R. Ham

ilton, Esquire Gregory S. McK

ee, Esquire Ryan T. Ke ating, Esquire Dawn C. Doherty , Esquire T heodore J. S egletes, III, Esquire John D. Balaguer, Esquire Christine Kane, Esquire Neilli M. Walsh, Esquire