The Pennsylvania Supreme Court decided Mitchell v. Shikora in favor of Pennsylvania’s physicians. 

All seven justices agreed and held that evidence regarding risks and complications of a surgical procedure may be admissible in medical negligence actions to assist in establishing the standard of care. In a dissenting/concurring opinion, however, two of the justices essentially opined that risks and complications evidence is not always germane and should be considered on a case-by-case basis.

PAMED action: On Dec. 1, 2017, the Pennsylvania Medical Society (PAMED) Executive Committee approved the filing of an amicus curiae brief with the American Medical Association (AMA) in the state Supreme Court case Mitchell v. Shikora. The brief argued that the Superior Court has misapplied the holding in Urbas and its decision should be reversed.  The state Supreme Court heard the case in October 2018. On June 18, 2019, also relying on its decision in Brady v. Urbas, the Court reversed the Superior Court. The state Supreme Court held that evidence regarding risks and complications of a surgical procedure may be admissible at trial.

Court opinions:

Concurring opinion_Shikora

Dissenting Concurring opinion_Shikora

Majority_Shikora