 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Curtis v. Columbia Doctors' Hospaital of Opelousas12/17/2003
PUBLISHED
AFFIRMED.
Saunders, J., dissents and assigns written reasons.
The plaintiff filed suit against the defendant hospital alleging that she fell from a bed at the facility following total knee replacement surgery. She sought damages associated with the complications and surgeries subsequent to the fall. Following a bench trial, the trial court concluded that the plaintiff failed to prove that the fall resulted from negligent care by the hospital. The plaintiff appeals. For the following reasons, we affirm.
Factual and Procedural Background
The plaintiff, Allean Curtis, was a patient in the rehabilitation unit of Columbia Doctors' Hospital of Opelousas on July 10, 1997. She had been admitted to the rehabilitation unit following a total knee replacement performed at the hospital on June 30, 1997. The instant matter arose due to a fall Ms. Curtis suffered on the morning of July 10.
The plaintiff alleges that the bed rails along the side of the bed were not in their upright position and that the fall resulted when she tried to roll over in bed. She contends that the hospital staff was required to keep the rails in their upright position as she was at a high risk for falling. She alleges that this risk resulted from the type of surgery from which she was recovering, her mental health history, and the type of medications she required. She contends that these factors indicated that she should have been closely monitored/supervised under the hospital's Fall Alert Program and that the failure to more closely follow the requirements of the program caused her injuries.
As a result of the fall, the plaintiff required an immediate corrective surgery. Her course subsequent to this second surgery was difficult, with history of an infection and additional hospitalization and procedures. Suit was filed against Doctors' Hospital and the physician who performed the initial total knee replacement. The physician was ultimately dismissed from the suit. The defendant hospital refuted the allegation that the bed rails were not in their upright position.
In reasons for ruling, the trial court concluded that the plaintiff failed to meet her burden of proving that the fall resulted from negligence of the hospital or hospital staff. In particular, the trial court concluded that the evidence did not support the plaintiff's allegation of having fallen from the bed. Rather, the trial court concluded, the evidence indicated that the plaintiff attempted to travel to the bathroom unaccompanied and fell while trying to do so.
The plaintiff appeals, assigning the following as error:
The Court committed legal error or manifest error that plaintiff did not prove it's case by a preponderance of the evidence in spite of overwhelming evidence in plaintiff's favor.
The plaintiff asks that, in the event the trial court's determination is reversed on appeal, damages be awarded.
Discussion
The plaintiff contends that the evidence presented indicated that the side rails were required to be in their upright position and that they were not in place at the time of the fall. In her brief to this court, the plaintiff states that: "It is almost impossible for the accident to have happened any other way than the plaintiff described, supporting plaintiff's argument that the Court committed legal error." She later states that: "Even if she somehow got out of bed, rather than rolled out, the probability is great that the hospital did not follow the mandate of the fall alert; i.e., side rails up at all times, directly and negligently leading to the accident." The plaintiff argues alter
Page 1 2 3 4 Louisiana Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|