Emergency Medicine Expert Barred from Offering Legal Conclusions Regarding whether EMTALA was Violated
Posted on March 27, 2025 by Expert Witness Profiler
The present case stems from incidents occurring around 2:00 a.m. on December 18, 2020, when Angela Cleveland arrived at the Emergency Department (ED) entrance of Bienville Medical Center (BMC) with her 29-year-old son, Kedeldric Dontrez Brown. The Plaintiff has brought claims under the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA), asserting that Brown’s death resulted from BMC’s failure or refusal to provide a necessary medical screening or treatment to assess whether he had an emergency medical condition.
In response, the Defendant has designated Dr. Rebecca Hutchings, a physician specializing in emergency medicine, as an expert witness regarding the allegations in this case and has presented her expert report, which includes analysis of the EMTALA claims. Plaintiff Brianna Babers filed a motion contesting the admissibility of Hutchings’ expert opinion on whether BMC’s treatment of Brown on December 18, 2020, constituted a violation of EMTALA.
Emergency Medicine Expert Witness
Rebecca Hutchings is board certified in both emergency medicine and pediatrics. She has served as the director of medical education for the division of emergency medicine at Children’s Hospital New Orleans.
Hutchings is also an Associate Adjunct Clinical Professor of Pediatrics at the Tulane University School of Medicine. She attended medical school at New York University followed by an Emergency Medicine residency at Louisiana State University, New Orleans.
Discussion by the Court
Babers’ motion argued that Hutchings should not have been allowed to testify about legal conclusions, specifically whether BMC’s actions violated EMTALA. Babers maintained that determining an EMTALA violation was a legal question for the Court, not an expert. Therefore, Babers contended that any testimony from Hutchings interpreting EMTALA or offering legal conclusions should have been excluded under Federal Rule of Evidence 702 and the Daubert standard. In response, BMC agreed that experts could not offer legal conclusions but argued that Hutchings was qualified to provide expert testimony on emergency medicine, which was relevant to the EMTALA claims. BMC asserted that Hutchings’ extensive emergency medicine experience allowed her to testify on the medical aspects of the case, even without stating whether EMTALA was violated. BMC urged the Court to allow Hutchings to testify within her area of expertise.
Because the parties agreed that experts could not offer legal conclusions, the Court granted Babers’ motion to the extent that it sought to exclude Hutchings’ testimony offering legal conclusions on EMTALA violations. Such testimony was inadmissible and would be excluded. However, Hutchings remained qualified to testify as an emergency medicine expert and could offer opinions within her expertise that did not constitute impermissible legal conclusions.
Held
The Court granted the Plaintiff’s Daubert motion/motion in limine to limit/exclude the testimony of Defendants’ expert witness, Dr. Rebecca Hutchings. Hutchings cannot provide legal opinions on EMTALA violations but may testify as an emergency medicine expert.
Key Takeaway:
The case centers on a lawsuit alleging Bienville Medical Center (BMC) violated EMTALA in its treatment of Kedeldric Dontrez Brown, who later died after presenting to the emergency department. The Plaintiff challenged the admissibility of the Defendant’s emergency medicine expert, Dr. Rebecca Hutchings, arguing she should not offer legal conclusions on whether BMC violated EMTALA. The Court agreed that experts cannot provide legal conclusions and thus excluded any of Hutchings’s testimony that offered such conclusions. However, Hutchings remained qualified to testify as an emergency medicine expert and could offer opinions within her medical expertise, as long as they did not constitute impermissible legal conclusions
Case Details:
| Case Caption: | Babers V. Bienville Medical Center Inc Et Al |
| Docket Number: | 5:21cv4338 |
| Court Name: | United States District Court, Louisiana Western |
| Order Date: | March 25, 2025 |
