 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Frye v. University of Cincinnati9/14/2004
duty of care owed to plaintiff.
{ } The Tenth District Court of Appeals has stated that foresight, not hindsight, is the standard of diligence. The court explained that " t is nearly always easy, after an accident has happened, to see how it could have been avoided. But negligence is not a matter to be judged after the occurrence." Grabill v. Worthington Industries, Inc. (1994), 98 Ohio App.3d 739, 744.
{ } The court further finds that although there are certain risk factors for shoulder dystocia, shoulder dystocia is unpredictable and that Dr. Hillard acted reasonably when she allowed Dr. Walton to attempt to resolve the shoulder dystocia before she stepped in. For the foregoing reasons, the court finds that plaintiff has failed to prove that defendant breached any duty of care and, accordingly, judgment shall be rendered in favor of defendant.
JUDGMENT ENTRY
This case was tried to the court on the issue of liability. The court has considered the evidence and, for the reasons set forth in the decision filed concurrently herewith, judgment is rendered in favor of defendant. Court costs are assessed against plaintiff. The clerk shall serve upon all parties notice of this judgment and its date of entry upon the journal.
FRED J. SHOEMAKER Judge
Page 1 2 3 4 5 Ohio Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|