 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Woodward v. Research Medical Center8/23/2005
Opinion Vote: AFFIRMED IN PART AND REVERSED IN PART.
Howard, P.J. and Smart,J. concur.
Opinion:
Mr. William Woodward challenges a circuit court order denying his motion for new trial in a wrongful-death and survivorship case arising from the death of his wife Elsie three months after she fell at Research Medical Center (Research). Research files a cross-appeal, challenging the circuit court's order denying its motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict. Mr. Woodward claims error in the circuit court's denial of his requested wrongful-death verdict-directing instruction, while Research asserts error in submitting to the jury Mr. Woodward's claim for loss-of-consortium damages in relation to his survivorship action, section 537.020. We affirm in part and reverse in part and remand for further proceedings.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
Ms. Woodward, who was 79 when she died, entered Research Medical Center in August 2000 for a medical procedure intended to relieve her severe chest pain. Stents were successfully inserted into her blood vessels during a cardiac catheterization procedure. Her recovery was well underway when, hours before she was due to be released from the hospital, she fell and suffered an undiagnosed broken hip and several cardiac arrests that affected her brain function. She never returned home after the fall, and a final heart attack ultimately caused Ms. Woodward's demise in November.
In the hours preceding Ms. Woodward's fall, care was provided by a nurse who had been temporarily reassigned from another unit and was not entirely familiar with the specialized needs of and treatment for critical-care cardiac patients. Ms. Woodward's blood pressure was supposed to be controlled with nitroglycerin that was not to exceed a prescribed dosage of 90 micrograms per minute. The nurse, however, in consultation with his supervising nurse, bumped the medication up to 100 micrograms per minute without authorization from any doctor, because Ms. W In the hours preceding Ms. Woodward's fall, care was provided by a nurse who had been temporarily reassigned from another unit and was not entirely familiar with the specialized needs of and treatment for critical-care cardiac patients. Ms. Woodward's blood pressure was supposed to be controlled with nitroglycerin that was not to exceed a prescribed dosage of 90 micrograms per minute. The nurse, however, in consultation with his supervising nurse, bumped the medication up to 100 micrograms per minute without authorization from any doctor, because Ms. Woodward's systolic blood pressure continued to exceed the upper limit of 150 set by her doctor. The nurse later recorded an episode of confusion that Ms. Woodward exhibited during the night and again failed to inform her doctor about this aspect of her recovery.
In the morning, Mr. Woodward, who had arrived early to bring his wife home, rang for care so his wife could be assisted to the restroom. The nursing shift had changed, but the new attending nurse was not fully briefed about Ms. Woodward's condition. Without checking Ms. Woodward's chart or blood pressure, the new nurse helped her stand from a sitting position and had Ms. Woodward push her IV pole, an acknowledged tripping hazard, as they proceeded toward the restroom. Before they reached the restroom, Ms. Woodward fell. The nurse either left the room, according to Mr. Woodward, or reached for the door to the hallway to close it, according to the nurse. In either event, the nurse was not in physical contact with Ms. Woodward when she fell. There was also a dispute about how Ms. Woodward fell, either squarely on her buttocks or on her side, but she complained about pa
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Missouri Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|