In Kanaly v. DeMartino, (3d June 2018), the Appellate Division, Third Department, took the opportunity to modify its rule concerning expert disclosure in medical malpractice cases. Initially, the Court confirmed that each defendant is entitled to expert disclosure from plaintiff directed specifically at each defendant. Notably, the Court also held that parties in medical malpractice cases are ordinarily entitled to full disclosure of the qualifications of an opponent’s expert [except for the expert’s name] including the names of any institutions where the expert studied or worked, areas of practice and dates of graduation, licensure, training, education and experience. The Court also took the opportunity to rule that the defendants in the case were entitled to unrestricted authorizations to obtain decedent’s medical records for 10 years preceding her death where the plaintiff placed at issue decedent’s full medical history for an extended but unspecified period of time. While the plaintiff maintained that the disclosure would place the expert’s identify at risk of discovery through the use of computer software, the Court declined to accept this as a reason to deny defendants the information related to the expert’s qualifications. The Court’s decision makes clear that a a heavy burden rests with plaintiffs who seek to deny defendants information related to their expert’s qualifications.
