 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Stage v. Mt. Clemens General Hospital11/26/2002
UNPUBLISHED
In this medical malpractice case tried before a jury, plaintiffs appeal by right an order denying their motions for judgment notwithstanding the verdict (JNOV), new trial, and additur. We affirm.
I. Background
Beginning in May 1991, plaintiff, Kimberley A. Stage, began complaining to her doctor of irregular menstrual cycle, bloating, and heavy menses. An examination revealed a normal endometrial lining and no mass. She was prescribed Darvocet for the pain. After approximately one year of similar complaints and prescriptions, plaintiff presented to Lenna V. Dines, D.O., an osteopathic general surgeon, complaining of severe pain in her pelvic region. A laparoscopy revealed endometrial implants on plaintiff's left ovary and fallopian tube. Although at trial it was contested whether Dines consulted with plaintiff about the options for treating endometriosis, plaintiff ultimately elected to undergo surgery in December 1994. Dines performed the surgery at defendant MCGH's facility removing plaintiff's uterus, cervix, and fallopian tubes. Because plaintiff continued to complain of pelvic pain, plaintiff underwent a second surgery to remove her left ovary on which had developed a large cyst. Dines did not remove plaintiff's right ovary. Plaintiff continued to complain of pain through July 1994. Because Dines could not identify an etiology for this pain, she advised plaintiff to seek treatment at a pain clinic. Plaintiff's right ovary was eventually removed.
Plaintiffs brought this medical malpractice action against Dines and defendant MCGH. Against both defendants, plaintiffs alleged negligence for performing an unnecessary hysterectomy, failing to offer/perform alternative procedures, and failure to obtain a second opinion. Against defendant MCGH, plaintiffs also alleged negligent credentialing of Dines. Plaintiff Edward Stage alleged a claim for loss of consortium.
Following trial, the jury returned a verdict for plaintiffs against defendant estate in the amount of $46,000 for non-economic damages from the time of the surgery until one year thereafter. The jury found that Dines was negligent. The jury found no cause of action against defendant MCGH. Plaintiffs filed motions for JNOV, new trial, and additur. The trial court denied these motions.
II. JNOV
Plaintiffs argue that the trial court erred in denying their motion for JNOV. We disagree. This Court reviews a trial court's decision with regard to a motion for JNOV de novo. Morinelli v Provident Life and Accident Ins Co, 242 Mich App 255, 260; 617 NW2d 777 (2000). This Court views the testimony and all legitimate inferences that may be drawn therefrom in a light most favorable to the nonmoving party and "if reasonable jurors could have honestly reached different conclusions, the jury verdict must stand." Id. at 260-261.
Plaintiffs argue that, because the jury found Dines negligent in failing to offer/explain other treatment for endometriosis, the jury should also have found defendant MCGH negligent on the same basis. However, to establish vicarious liability against a hospital, a plaintiff must show that an agent of the hospital committed malpractice. Cox v Flint Bd of Hospital Mgrs, 467 Mich 1, 42-43; 651 NW2d 356 (2002). Here, the evidence established that Dines was not an agent of defendant MCGH, but rather an independent staff physician. Therefore, we find this argument without merit.
Plaintiffs also argue that the trial court should have held that MCL 333.21513 "automatically holds the [defendant MCGH] liable" for Dines' negligence. Plaintiff did not seriously argue this issue before the trial court but merely objected to the
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 Michigan Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|