 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Hobbs v. Lopez6/30/1994
This is an appeal from a judgment of the Scioto County Common Pleas Court. The court dismissed Joni Hobbs's medical malpractice and invasion of privacy complaint against Drs. Lopez and Pettit. We affirm in part and reverse in part.
On June 7, 1990, Joni Hobbs, age twenty-one, consulted Lopez, an employee of the George P. Pettit, M.D. Corporation, concerning a medical problem she had. After an examination and a series of tests, it was determined that Hobbs was pregnant. Lopez discussed the different medical procedures available for pregnancy, including the possibility of an abortion of the fetus.
Following the consultation, Lopez instructed one of the employees of the corporation, his nurse, whom Hobbs named in her complaint as Jane Doe, to call Hobbs to find out what course of treatment she had decided to follow. The nurse called Hobbs's parents' home and told her mother that Hobbs was pregnant and had sought medical advice about an abortion. Hobbs's mother was angered and upset about the news of the pregnancy, and told Hobbs of her family's extreme displeasure about the pregnancy and her contemplation of an abortion. As a result of the nurse's disclosure of the pregnancy to her family, Hobbs claimed she suffered extreme humiliation, mental and emotional injury , and the loss of companionship, affection, counsel and society of her parents and family.
Hobbs filed a complaint against Lopez, George P. Pettit, M.D., Inc. and Jane Doe, nurse, on October 18, 1991. The complaint alleged causes of action for medical malpractice, invasion of privacy and breach of privilege, intentional infliction of emotional distress, negligent infliction of emotional distress and breach of contract. The complaint also asserted that Jane Doe, nurse, acted as an agent of Lopez and Pettit's corporation. Hobbs did not, however, attach an affidavit to her complaint as required by R.C. 2307.42(C)(3). Hobbs obtained service on both Lopez and George P. Pettit, M.D., Inc. She did not obtain service of the complaint on Jane Doe, nurse, nor did she ever assert a claim against that nurse in her true identity.
After Hobbs filed her complaint the following happened in chronological order:
December 5, 1991: Lopez and Corporation answer, asserting the trial court's lack of subject matter jurisdiction and Hobbs's failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted pursuant to Civ.R. 12(B)(6).
January 9, 1992: Lopez and Corporation file a motion to dismiss on jurisdictional and Civ.R. 12(B)(6) grounds.
February 10, 1992: Hobbs files a memo contra motion to dismiss and a motion for leave to amend her October 18, 1991 complaint.
April 24, 1992: Conference with Judge Burton re defendants' motions.
May 22, 1992: Trial court denies Hobbs's motion for leave to amend.
May 26, 1992: Hobbs appeals.
Hobbs assigns three errors.
FIRST ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR
"The trial court erred in dismissing the first, second, seventh and eighth claims of the Appellant/Plaintiff's complaint upon the grounds that the allegations failed to state a claim on which relief can be granted."
Hobbs's first claim is a claim of breach of privilege. Her second claim is one of unlawful invasion of privacy. Hobbs's seventh cause of action is one for intentional infliction of emotional distress and her eighth cause of action is for negligent infliction of emotional distress.
In her first claim, Hobbs asserts that the physician-patient privilege extended to Jane Doe, nurse, since she acted as an agent for Lopez. She further asserts that such an agency relationship would i
Page 1 2 3 4 Ohio Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|