WILLIAM DONALD SCHAEFER, Governor

("Current law requires a certificate from a qualified expert but
does not specify who may or may not serve as an expert...
Testimony indicated that in some cases a party files a
certificate as the party's own expert."; Report of the Tort and
Insurance Reform Oversight Committee — 1987 Interim at 21-22 "No
statutory provision specifically precludes a defendant health
care provider from filing his own certificate as an attesting
expert, although the HCAO interprets the statute to preclude such
a certification of meritorious defense.").

Further, there is some evidence in the legislative history of the
1986 law that its provisions relating to experts were not
intended to impose too great a burden on the parties. At the
request of the Administration and Senate President Steinberg, an
amendment was dropped from the bill limiting the use of experts
in the circuit court. See Amendment to Senate Bill 559 attached
to February 14, 1986 Letter to Senate President Steinberg and
Senator Miller. 3/ In addition, the 1986 Act expressly permitted
parties proceeding pro se to file the certificate without
suggesting that a pro se defendant would be put to the added
expense of obtaining another qualified expert to attest to the
certificate. (See 3-2A-04(b)(3)).

Finally, I should note that while only three other states
(California, Illinois, and North Dakota) require an expert
certification of a plaintiff, none but Maryland requires it of a
defendant. The practical applications of this bill present a
real and significant departure from our efforts to reduce medical
malpractice costs, and when viewed in conjunction with the
disparity of penalties imposed on the plaintiff and defendant and
the requirement that the defendant must secure an independent
expert or risk the imposition of summary judgment, (a substantial
departure from a well reasoned common law rule) I have great
difficulties with this bill.

For the above reasons, I have decided to veto House Bill 1285.

Sincerely,

William Donald Schaefer

Governor

1/

Section 3-2A-04(b)(1) and (2) states that:

"Unless the sole issue in the claim is lack of informed
consent:

- 5451 -