ga~ AV
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR MONTGOMERY COUNTY, MARYLAND
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -x
WILLIAM F . X . BECKER, et al .
Plaintiffs
v . Civil No . 162670
WASHINGTON ADVENTIST HOSPITAL,
et al .
Defendants
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -x
JURY TRIAL (Resumed)
Rockville, Maryland February 13, 2001
MONTGOMERY TRANSCRIBERS, INC .
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR MONTGOMERY COUNTY, MARYLAND
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -x
WILLIAM F. X . BECKER, et al
Plaintiffs
v . Civil No . 162670
WASHINGTON ADVENTIST HOSPITAL,
et al .,
Defendants
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -x
February 13, 2001
Rockville, Maryland
WHEREUPON, the proceedings in the above-entitled
matter resumed
BEFORE : THE HONORABLE WILLIAM ROWAN JUDGE
APPEARANCES :
FOR THE PLAINTIFFS :
PAMELA B . STUART, ESQ .
KATHLEEN VOLKER, ESQ .
FOR THE DEFENDANTS :
BENJAMIN S . VAUGHN, ESQ .
PAMELA KINCHELOE, ESQ .
On behalf of Washington Adventist Hospital
A . GWINN BOWIE, JR ., ESQ .
ROBERT J . FARLEY, ESQ .
On behalf of Dr . Simon
MONTGOMERY TRANSCRIBERS, INC .
I N D E X
Page
Matters
the Plaintiffs :
the Defendants :
M . DONN, M . D
BOLAN, M . D .
r the Plaintiffs :
41
42
43
44
45
46
DIRECT CROSS REDIRECT RECROSS
/voiz dire/
23/47/ 122 168 170
172/178 194 254
For Identification
52
55
133
152
159
199
In Evidence
MONTGOMERY TRANSCRIBERS, INC .
4
P R O C E E D I N G S
THE CLERK : Civil 162670, William F .X . Becker,
Roberto Rostran, Luis Galindo, Aracely Galindo versus
Washington Adventist Hospital, and Guillermo Simon, M .D .
MS . STUART : Pamela Stuart on behalf of the
Plaintiffs .
MR . VAUGHAN : Ben Vaughan on behalf of
lc
11
1L
1 ,:
19
1~
1E
1i
1£
15
2C
21
22
2 .
2z
Washington Adventist Hospital .
MS . KINCHELOE : Pam Kincheloe on behalf of the
Washington Adventist Hospital .
MR . BOWIE : Good morning, Your Honor . Gwynn
Bowie and Bob Farley on behalf of Dr . Simon .
MS . STUART : And Kathleen Volker is here as
well, on behalf of the plaintiffs .
MS . VOLKER : Good morning, Your Honor .
THE COURT : We always acknowledge you .
MS . VOLKER : Thank you, Your Honor . Appreciate
it .
VOICE : Even when -- (inaudible) .
THE COURT : That\'s right -- did he say even when
you\'re not here?
MS . VOLKER : Correct .
THE COURT : Yes, ma\'am .
MS . STUART : Your Honor, I think there may be a
5
need for a preliminary hearing before the next witness
takes the stand. I think the Court, in its function as a
gatekeeper, may not permit the testimony of this witness to
be heard by the jurors .
THE COURT : Is this the gentleman who\'s going to
be a witness?
MS . STUART : Yes .
THE COURT : Sir, would you -- what is your name,
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
sir?
MR . BOWIE : Dr . Donn, Your Honor .
THE COURT : Dr . Donn, would you mind stepping
out of the courtroom for a second?
[Witness leaving courtroom .]
THE COURT : Okay, tell me what the problem is,
with Dr . Donn . What\'s his expertise?
MS . STUART : He\'s a neonatologist .
And originally he was proffered as a witness on
the standard of care with respect to the resuscitation, and
neonatal care at Washington Adventist Hospital . And that\'s
how he was introduced at his deposition .
However, Z just checked, and when the defense
designated him, they designated him as both a standard of
care and causation expert .
241 During the course of his deposition, it came out
6
that his opinion concerning the time of the injury was
based on an assessment of the number of nucleated red blood
cells that were shown in a blood gas that was done shortly
after the birth of this child.
Subsequently, I and a lot of other people have
had an opportunity to research the literature on this, and
as --
8 THE COURT : Well, what does he say as to the
time of the injury?
10 MS . STUART : He says it\'s at least 12 hours
11 before the birth .
12 The bottom line, Your Honor, is that this
1 nucleated red blood cell theory is at best controversial .
14 It is not generally accepted within the scientific
1 community . It is undergoing investigation at the present
11 time .
17 The doctor who originally formulated this theory
18 has had some problems with the underlying data, and it is
1 our belief that this evidence does not meet the test of
2 being generally accepted within the scientific community
21 such that it can be presented to the jurors .
22 THE COURT : Vauqhan?
23 MR . VAUGHAN : First of all, it is one of several
241 bases for his opinion . I think the mere fact that --
Maryland doesn\'t follow the Doddard rule --
MS . STUART : We know that .
MR . VAUGHAN : -- and I don\'t know if you were
heading towards Doddard or not, but under the Frier Reed
test, it need not be accepted by the entire medical
community to be a legitimate scientific theory .
Number two, the mere fact that there is
controversy doesn\'t mean it doesn\'t pass the Frier-Reed
test .
1 Number three, I think it is accepted enoug