Case Name: Jeanette COOPER, Respondent, v. SSM HEALTH CARE, d/b/a St. Mary's Health Center, Appellant
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 1998-10-27
Citations: 979 S.W.2d 507
Docket Number: No. 73433
Parties: Jeanette COOPER, Respondent, v. SSM HEALTH CARE, d/b/a St. Mary’s Health Center, Appellant.
Judges: Before ROBERT G. DOWD, Jr., C.J., KENT E. KAROHL, J., and CHARLES B. BLACKMAR, Senior Judge.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Second Series
Volume: 979
Pages: 507–507

Head Matter:
Jeanette COOPER, Respondent, v. SSM HEALTH CARE, d/b/a St. Mary’s Health Center, Appellant.
No. 73433.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Five.
Oct. 27, 1998.
G. Keith Phoenix, St. Louis, for appellant.
John G. Simón, St. Louis, for respondent.
Before ROBERT G. DOWD, Jr., C.J., KENT E. KAROHL, J., and CHARLES B. BLACKMAR, Senior Judge.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
SSM Health Care (Appellant) appeals from a judgment entered on a jury verdict in favor of Jeanette Cooper (Respondent). Appellant alleges the trial court erred in: (1) allowing the expert testimony of Dr. Schwartz because he lacked the knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education to testify as an expert witness; (2) submitting a verdict directing instruction allowing the jury to conclude Dr. Bauman inserted the surgical instrument alleged to have caused the injuries; (3) submitting a verdict directing instruction allowing the jury to conclude Dr. McCleave was an agent of Appellant; and (4) denying Appellant's motions for directed verdict and judgment notwithstanding the verdict or in the alternative for new trial. We affirm.
We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find the claims of error to be without merit. An opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating principles of law would have no precedential value. The judgment is affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).