Expert witness sues ophthalmology society

The case highlights the debate on whether medical associations have a role in policing physicians' courtroom testimony.

By Amy Lynn Sorrel, AMNews staff. Oct. 22/29, 2007.

When Golden Valley, Minn., ophthalmologist Charles Yancey, MD, got a fax notifying him that the American Academy of Ophthalmology was going to review his expert testimony in a medical liability trial, the physician was shocked, his attorney said.

It was the first time Dr. Yancey had served as a medical expert witness, and "he felt an ethical obligation to step forward and do this," his lawyer, Michael A. Zimmer, said. But the fact that Dr. Yancey received the faxed letter the day before his deposition in a subsequent trial on damages in the case, "was clear evidence that this complaint was filed ... to try to get him to alter his testimony," said Zimmer, who practices in Minneapolis.

Now, Dr. Yancey is suing the Academy and the two doctors who filed a complaint against him for allegedly giving inaccurate testimony. Dr. Yancey claims all three conspired to defame and intimidate him so he wouldn't testify in other cases, according to the lawsuit filed in July.

But AAO General Counsel Katherine Salazar-Poss said the case is an effort to undermine the very process that members of the Academy agree to when they join, which is to ensure that doctors adhere to the same ethical standards in the courtroom as they would in the exam room.

"Our [expert testimony] rule recognizes that doctors, in all the various tasks they are called on to perform, often find themselves in the position of testifying in the courtroom," Salazar-Poss said. "All it says is that should be done in an objective manner."