 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Taylor v. Shelby County Health Care Corp.11/10/2005
I. Statement of Facts & Procedural History
On November 21, 1999, Ms. Dena M. Taylor ("Patient" or "Appellant") arrived at the Regional Medical Center (the "Med") in Memphis, Tennessee seeking treatment for severe leg pain. Upon admittance to the emergency room, Dr. Christie A. Green ("Doctor" or "Appellee") began medical diagnosis of Patient. Doctor elicited Patient's medical history from her, performed a physical examination, and ordered certain tests along with Patient's chart.
At 8:00 p.m., Doctor's shift ended, and Dr. Todd Overby assumed care for all of Doctor's patients. Dr. Overby subsequently diagnosed Patient with sickle cell crisis. Dr. Overby then released Patient from the Med at 1:25 a.m. on November 22, 1999. Later in the evening after continuing to complain of severe leg pain, Patient presented to Baptist Memorial Hospital for treatment. At Baptist Memorial Hospital, doctors diagnosed Patient with aortic occlusion. On November 26, 1999, Patient underwent above-knee amputation of her left leg.
On November 20, 2000, Patient filed suit against Doctor, the Med, and Dr. Tasha Ford alleging medical malpractice. On January 30, 2001, Doctor filed a motion for summary judgment. Doctor then filed a renewed motion for summary judgment on May 24, 2004. In support of her motion, Doctor filed an affidavit wherein she asserts that she did not deviate from the standard of care, and, that if she did, her deviation did not proximately cause Patient's injuries. Thereafter, Patient filed a response to Doctor's motion for summary judgment along with the deposition her expert, Dr. Frank Mushkat ("Dr. Mushkat"), in support of her response.
Subsequently, the circuit court conducted a hearing on Doctor's motion for summary judgment. At the hearing, both Patient and Doctor attempted to point to different statements made by Dr. Mushkat in his deposition to support their respective positions. The circuit court continued the hearing and requested that both parties file in writing what facts they rely on in Dr. Mushkat's deposition in support of their respective position, including what page number in the deposition and line number on the page to find those facts. Instead of filing what the court requested, Patient filed a supplemental affidavit by Dr. Mushkat in which Dr. Mushkat attempted to clarify his opinions stated in his deposition. In response to this filing, the court stated to counsel for Patient:
That is not what I asked you to do. I told you what I wanted you to do when we were here before. There was a deposition, you know, and I was ready to rule against you when we were here before. And I gave you all specific instructions of what to do. Because there was a deposition extant that you relied upon, and rather than we take our time going through that in court, I put the onus on you to say that where in that deposition you relied. If you haven't done it, then I am granting the motion.
The judge told you what to do and how to do it. There is no deviation. I said plainly how I wanted it. You might want to give it to me another way, and some other judge may request it another way. This judge told you how I want it. Either you have got it or you don't. If you don't have it, the motion is granted. It is as plain as that.
The circuit court thereafter allowed Patient to present the information it requested orally. The court then granted Doctor's motion for summary judgment.
II. Issues Presented
Appellant has filed a timely notice of appeal to this Court presenting the following issue for review:
1. Whether the circuit court erred when it granted summary judgment to Appellee. Appel
Page 1 2 3 Tennessee Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|