A state’s Supreme Court will hear arguments in a civil case in which four physicians were cleared by a jury of medical malpractice in the misdiagnosis of a child with Rocky Mountain spotted fever. The decision could have a lasting effect on medical malpractice lawsuits and whether defendants can be excused for not foreseeing the impacts of their acts. The state Supreme Court is deciding whether the jurors should have been given certain legal instructions regarding hindsight prior to deliberating the case of the child. The parents alleged that the physicians were negligent when they failed to spot the symptoms of the rare tick-borne illness in their child. The doctors initially thought the child suffered from an enterovirus. They claimed their son suffered permanent brain damage. The state Supreme Court will consider whether an instruction given by the presiding judge regarding hindsight is an inaccurate or confusing statement of law that should be overturned. The instruction states “negligence consists of foreseeing and guarding against that which is possible and likely to happen, not against that which is only remotely and slightly possible.” To read the full story, click here.