Valerie Scott v. Christiana Care Health Services, Inc.

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

VALERIE SCOTT and ERIC SCOTT, ) Individually and on behalf of the Minor ) Plaintiff, D.S., ) ) Plaintiffs, ) C.A. No. N25C-06-050 KMM ) v. ) ) CHRISTIANA CARE HEALTH ) SERVICES, INC., ) ) Defendant. )

Date Submitted: July 1, 2025 Date Decided: August 1, 2025

ORDER ON REVIEW OF AFFIDAVIT OF MERIT

1. Plaintiffs Valerie and Eric Scott filed this medical negligence action individually and on the behalf of Minor Plaintiff D.S. on June 5, 2025. The complaint alleges that D.S. sustained hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy, permanent brain damage, and cerebral palsy as a direct result of the negligent fetal monitorization and medical treatment provided by Defendant Christiana Care Health Services, Inc. (“Christiana Care”) to Valerie Scott and D.S. in the labor and delivery unit of Christiana Hospital. As required by 18 Del. C. § 6853, plaintiffs filed an Affidavit of Merit.

2. On July 1, 2025, Defendant filed a Motion for In Camera Review of the Affidavit of Merit pursuant to 18 Del. C. § 6853(d).

3. In healthcare negligence cases, a plaintiff must submit an affidavit of merit as to each defendant, signed by an expert and accompanied by a current curriculum vitae, which states that “there are reasonable grounds to believe that there has been health-care medical negligence committed by each defendant.”1 Additionally, the affidavit must state that there are “reasonable grounds to believe that the applicable standard of care was breached” by each defendant and that the breach was a proximate cause of the complained of injuries.2 An expert signing the affidavit must be licensed to practice as of the date of the affidavit and, in the 3 years immediately preceding the alleged negligence, has been engaged “in the treatment of patients and/or in the teaching/academic side of medicine in the same or similar field of medicine” as the defendant.3 Finally, the expert is to be Board certified “in the same or similar field of medicine” if the defendant is Board certified.4

4. While the statute and the affidavit of merit “play an important role in preventing frivolous claims,” the requirements “are purposefully minimal.”5 The

1 18 Del. C. § 6853(a)(1). 2 18 Del. C. § 6853(c). 3 Id. 4 The statutory requirement of the expert being Board certified only applies when the defendant is a physician. See McNulty v. Correct Care Solutions, LLC, 2017 WL 1323711, at *2 (Del. Super. Apr. 7, 2017) (requirement of “same or similar” Board certification does not apply where defendant is not a physician); Zappaterrini v. St. Francis Hosp., Inc., 2009 WL 1101618, at *1 (Del. Super. Apr. 22, 2019) (“[B]ecause the defendant is not a physician, the statutory requirement of similar Board certification is not applicable.”). 5 Dishmon v. Fucci, 32 A.3d 338, 342 (Del. 2011).

Court’s initial review is to “assume that statements in affidavits of merit are reliable without additional evidentiary support.”6

5. The Court has reviewed plaintiffs’ Affidavit of Merit which (i) is signed by the expert under oath; (ii) is accompanied by a current curriculum vitae; (iii) includes the expert’s opinion that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the applicable standard of care was breached by Christiana Care, and that the breaches were a proximate cause of the alleged injuries; (iv) establishes that the expert was licensed at the time of the affidavit; and (v) states that the expert currently is and has been in active medical practice for the three years preceding the alleged negligent acts. The expert is also Board certified in obstetrics and maternal fetal medicine.

6. Having reviewed in camera the Affidavit of Merit and accompanying curriculum vitae of plaintiffs’ expert, the Court finds that the affidavit complies with 18 Del. C. § 6853(a)(1) and (c).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

/s/Kathleen M. Miller Kathleen M. Miller, Judge

6 Id., at 342-43.