 |
|
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Groover v. Johnston11/10/2005 on Groover's claim for recovery under a theory of negligence per se.
" ven when negligence per se has been shown, proximate cause must still be proved. [Cits.]" Central Anesthesia Assoc., supra, 254 Ga. at 733. To recover under a negligence per se theory, Groover must establish that Johnston's violation of the statute governing delegation of his authority to nurses proximately caused Katheryn Groover's injury . This will require Groover to demonstrate a causal relationship between Katheryn Groover's injury and the ordering and administration of pain medication by the nurses in the PACU in violation of OCGA ยง 43-34-26.1 (b). It will also require a showing that had the pain medication been selected and proper dosages ordered, either by Dr. Johnston or by a nurse with advanced training to whom he delegated his authority under a written protocol, Katheryn Groover would not have incurred the injury. See Rockefeller v. Kaiser Foundation Health Plan, 251 Ga. App. 699, 705 (1) (554 SE2d 623) (2001) (same causal connection must be shown to recover for improper delegation to physicians' assistants).
Groover may be able to prove causation at trial, but he has not yet done so. It follows that even though negligence per se was established, partial summary judgment was not appropriate because Groover has not shown proximate cause. In attempting to prove proximate cause, Groover will be permitted to present to the jury evidence showing negligence per se. Because a judgment right for any reason must be affirmed, see, e.g., Hall v. Coleman, 264 Ga. App. 650, 653 (1) (592 SE2d 120) (2003), we affirm the trial court's denial of Groover's motion for partial summary judgment.
Judgment affirmed in part and reversed in part. Ellington and Adams, JJ., concur.
Page 1 2 3 4 Georgia Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
|
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|