Connection lost
Server error
Costantino v. David M. Herzog, M.D., P.C. Case Brief
Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs
Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.
Adaptive Case Views
Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.
Exam-Ready IRAC Format
We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.
Complex Cases, Clarified
We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.
Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis
tl;dr: In a medical malpractice case, the court held that an instructional videotape can be admitted into evidence as a “learned treatise” under the hearsay exception, expanding the rule’s scope beyond traditional printed materials.
Legal Significance: This case established precedent in the Second Circuit that videotapes may qualify as “learned treatises” under Federal Rule of Evidence 803(18), promoting a functional approach to admissibility that prioritizes trustworthiness over the medium’s format.
Costantino v. David M. Herzog, M.D., P.C. Law School Study Guide
Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.
Case Facts & Court Holding
Key Facts & Case Background
The Costantinos sued Dr. Herzog for medical malpractice, alleging he caused their daughter’s Erb’s Palsy by improperly applying traction to her head during a delivery complicated by shoulder dystocia. The plaintiffs’ expert testified that any manipulation of the head deviated from the standard of care. To rebut this, the defense introduced a 15-minute instructional videotape produced by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG), a leading professional organization. The video, entitled “Shoulder Dystocia,” demonstrated accepted obstetrical maneuvers, including the application of “a limited” amount of traction to the fetal head. The plaintiffs objected to the video’s admission under the learned treatise hearsay exception, Federal Rule of Evidence (FRE) 803(18), arguing that a videotape is not a “published treatise, periodical, or pamphlet” and that its authoritativeness was not properly established. The trial judge, after an in camera review, admitted the video, finding it authoritative based on ACOG’s sponsorship, its use as a professional training resource, and the credentials of its narrator. The jury returned a verdict for the defendant, and the plaintiffs appealed the evidentiary ruling.
Court Holding & Legal Precedent
Issue: Does a videotape qualify as a “published treatise, periodical, or pamphlet” for the purpose of the learned treatise hearsay exception under Federal Rule of Evidence 803(18)?
Yes. The court held that videotapes are admissible as learned treatises under Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sun
IRAC Legal Analysis
Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades
IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.
Legal Issue
Does a videotape qualify as a “published treatise, periodical, or pamphlet” for the purpose of the learned treatise hearsay exception under Federal Rule of Evidence 803(18)?
Conclusion
This decision modernizes the learned treatise exception by holding that its application Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat.
Legal Rule
A videotape may be considered a learned treatise under Federal Rule of Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptat
Legal Analysis
The Second Circuit rejected a formalistic, plain-language interpretation of FRE 803(18) that Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut a
Flash-to-Full Case Opinions
Summary unavailable
No flash summary is available for this opinion.