§2794. Physicians, dentists, optometrists, and chiropractic physicians; malpractice;
burden of proof; jury charge; physician witness expert qualification
A. In a malpractice action based on the negligence of a physician licensed under
R.S. 37:1261 et seq., a dentist licensed under R.S. 37:751 et seq., an optometrist licensed
under R.S. 37:1041 et seq., or a chiropractic physician licensed under R.S. 37:2801 et
seq., the plaintiff shall have the burden of proving:
(1) The degree of knowledge or skill possessed or the degree of care ordinarily
exercised by physicians, dentists, optometrists, or chiropractic physicians licensed to
practice in the state of Louisiana and actively practicing in a similar community or locale
and under similar circumstances; and where the defendant practices in a particular
specialty and where the alleged acts of medical negligence raise issues peculiar to the
particular medical specialty involved, then the plaintiff has the burden of proving the
degree of care ordinarily practiced by physicians, dentists, optometrists, or chiropractic
physicians within the involved medical specialty.
(2) That the defendant either lacked this degree of knowledge or skill or failed to
use reasonable care and diligence, along with his best judgment in the application of that
skill.
(3) That as a proximate result of this lack of knowledge or skill or the failure to
exercise this degree of care the plaintiff suffered injuries that would not otherwise have
been incurred.
B. Any party to an action shall have the right to subpoena any physician, dentist,
optometrist, or chiropractor for a deposition or testimony for trial, or both, to establish the
degree of knowledge or skill possessed or degree of care ordinarily exercised as described
in Subsection A of this Section without obtaining the consent of the physician, dentist,
optometrist, or chiropractor who is going to be subpoenaed only if that physician, dentist,
optometrist, or chiropractor has or possesses special knowledge or experience in the
specific medical procedure or process that forms the basis of the action. The fee of the
physician, dentist, optometrist, or chiropractor called for deposition or testimony, or both,
under this Subsection shall be set by the court.
C. In medical malpractice actions the jury shall be instructed that the plaintiff has
the burden of proving, by a preponderance of the evidence, the negligence of the
physician, dentist, optometrist, or chiropractic physician. The jury shall be further
instructed that injury alone does not raise a presumption of the physician's, dentist's,
optometrist's, or chiropractic physician's negligence. The provisions of this Section shall
not apply to situations where the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur is found by the court to be
applicable.
D.(1) In a medical malpractice action against a physician, licensed to practice
medicine by the Louisiana State Board of Medical Examiners under R.S. 37:1261 et seq.,
for injury to or death of a patient, a person may qualify as an expert witness on the issue
of whether the physician departed from accepted standards of medical care only if the
person is a physician who meets all of the following criteria:
(a) He is practicing medicine at the time such testimony is given or was practicing
medicine at the time the claim arose.
(b) He has knowledge of accepted standards of medical care for the diagnosis,
care, or treatment of the illness, injury, or condition involved in the claim.
(c) He is qualified on the basis of training or experience to offer an expert opinion
regarding those accepted standards of care.
(d) He is licensed to practice medicine by the Louisiana State Board of Medical
Examiners under R.S. 37:1261 et seq., is licensed to practice medicine by any other
jurisdiction in the United States, or is a graduate of a medical school accredited by the
American Medical Association's Liaison Committee on Medical Education or the
American Osteopathic Association.
(2) For the purposes of this Subsection, "practicing medicine" or "medical
practice" includes but is not limited to training residents or students at an accredited
school of medicine or osteopathy or serving as a consulting physician to other physicians
who provide direct patient care, upon the request of such other physicians.
(3) In determining whether a witness is qualified on the basis of training or
experience, the court shall consider whether, at the time the claim arose or at the time the
testimony is given, the witness is board certified or has other substantial training or
experience in an area of medical practice relevant to the claim and is actively practicing in
that area.
(4) The court shall apply the criteria specified in Paragraphs (1), (2), and (3) of this
Subsection in determining whether a person is qualified to offer expert testimony on the
issue of whether the physician departed from accepted standards of medical care.
(5) Nothing in this Subsection shall be construed to prohibit a physician from
qualifying as an expert solely because he is a defendant in a medical malpractice claim.
Added by Acts 1975, No. 807, §1. Amended by Acts 1979, No. 545, §1; Acts
1985, No. 709, §1; Acts 1995, No. 821, §1; Acts 1997, No. 623, §1, eff. July 3, 1997;
Acts 2003, No. 581, §1, eff, June 27, 2003.