United States District Court, D. Alaska
Russel Holland United States District Judge
moves to strike plaintiffs’ third supplemental expert
witness disclosure.This motion is opposed. Oral argument
was requested but is not deemed necessary.
Niurka and Argenis Sambois bring this Federal Tort Claims Act
action in which they allege medical malpractice and other
claims arising out of Mrs. Sambois’ tubal ligation
which was performed on July 30, 2014 by Dr. Sheridan.
Plaintiffs allege that on May 11, 2014, Mrs. Sambois
“presented to Bassett [Army Hospital] to undergo
delivery of her second child by cesarean section surgery.
[She] requested a tubal ligation be performed during the
cesarean and the surgeon, Dr. Sheridan agreed to the
request.” Plaintiffs allege however that
“Dr. Sheridan failed to perform the tubal ligation as
agreed[, ]” thus requiring a separate procedure, during
which “Dr. Sheridan nicked, perforated, or otherwise
injured [Mrs. Sambois’] urinary bladder and/or
scheduling and planning order in this case provided that
plaintiffs’ expert disclosures were due on or before
October 19, 2018; defendant’s were due on or before
December 7, 2018; and any rebuttal expert reports were due on
or before January 12, 2019.These deadlines were
subsequently extended to March 5, 2019; April 23, 2019; and
May 29, 2019.
March 5, 2019, plaintiffs disclosed the expert report of Dr.
Charles Ascher-Walsh. In his report, Dr. Ascher-Walsh
reviewed Mrs. Sambois’ post-operative care and in this
review, he mentioned that she suffered from urinary
incontinence and eventually had an InterStim device
implanted. After reviewing Mrs. Sambois’
post-operative care, Dr. Ascher-Walsh set out Mrs.
Sambois’ “Claimed Injuries” as follows:
Ms. Sambois continues to suffer from chronic abdominal and
pelvic pain with intractable nausea and vomiting. She also
has recurrent rectal bleeding. In addition she suffers from
persistent insomnia, anxiety and depression. All of these
complaints are believed to have originated from the surgical
complications of the laparoscopic BTL on July 30, 2014
performed by Dr. Sheridan.
Dr. Ascher-Walsh then opined that
Dr. Sheridan’s care of Ms. Sambois demonstrates a
reckless deviation from the standard of care. Dr. Sheridan
should have performed the tubal ligation while performing the
cesarean section and therefore avoiding a further need for
surgery. When performing the surgery she did not take the
appropriate care to avoid injury to the bladder which she
documented as prominent only 8 weeks before. She also did not
take the appropriate steps to diagnose the bladder defect
subsequent to causing the injury.
disclosed its expert report on April 23, 2019; and on May 30,
2019, plaintiffs disclosed Dr. Ascher-Walsh’s rebuttal
report, in which he “completely disagree[d] with Dr.
Berry’s assessment of the care provided to Ms. Sambois
by Dr. Sheridan.” And, at his June 28, 2019
deposition, Dr. Ascher-Walsh testified that he did not have
any opinions other than those in his expert
16, 2019, plaintiffs disclosed an “Addendum Expert
Report” from Dr. Ascher-Walsh. In the Addendum Expert
Report, Dr. Ascher-Walsh stated that he was
asked to further discuss the placement of the Interstim
device and the reported ovarian cysts. The Interstim was
placed because of [Mrs. Sambois’] worsening urinary
urgency and frequency after the complicated tubal ligation.
The direct injury to the bladder and subsequent repair and
the inevitable scarring that resulted would have
significantly increased her risks for urinary urgency and
frequency. When this occurred after the injury, it is clear
that it was the injury that was the most likely cause of her
urinary problems. The placement of an Interstim device is an
invasive procedure that is typically left to the most severe
cases of urinary urgency and frequency. It is likely that Ms.
Sambois’ condition would never have progressed to this
degree if it were not for the bladder injury.
now moves to strike Dr. ...