The Superior Court of Pennsylvania held that a witness was qualified to testify as an expert in pharmacy practice.

The plaintiff brought a medical malpractice action against healthcare providers, including a pharmacy. The defendants filed a pre-trial motion seeking to exclude the plaintiff’s expert, arguing he was not qualified to testify. The trial court granted the motion.

On appeal, the Superior Court held that the witness was qualified to testify as an expert in pharmacy practice, as it was alleged that the interaction between medications filled at the pharmacy triggered a condition that caused the decedent’s death. The court explained that the witness was qualified as an expert because he had been a licensed pharmacist for 30 years, approximately ten of which were in retail and clinical pharmacy; he had also  worked for the United States Public Health Service, the National Cancer Institute, and the Environmental Protection Agency during his pharmacy career, and he remained a member of a national pharmacist association.

This case illustrates the importance of considering the actual qualifications of the proposed expert and the specific subject of the proposed testimony.

^{Case Law Alerts, 1st Quarter, January 2021 is prepared by Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin to provide information on recent developments of interest to our readers. This publication is not intended to provide legal advice for a specific situation or to create an attorney-client relationship. Copyright © 2021 Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin, all rights reserved. This article may not be reprinted without the express written permission of our firm.}