 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Slone v. Central Baptist Hospital2/4/2005
AFFIRMING
Irene Slone and Keith Slone (collectively referred to as appellants) bring this appeal from a July 2, 2003, trial verdict and judgment of the Fayette Circuit Court, dismissing their medical malpractice complaint. We affirm.
On July 30, 1997, Irene Slone went to the outpatient department of Central Baptist Hospital (Hospital) to have a cardiac catheterization. Irene had previously undergone two cardiac catheterizations and had a history of hypertension, mitral valve prolapse, hyperlipidemia and coronary artery disease. Following the catherization, Angio-Seal was utilized to clot the groin puncture site.
Several days later, it was determined that Irene had an occluded right femoral artery. Appellants allege the occluded artery was caused by the Angio-Seal. On August 25, 1997, an aortofemoral bypass graft was performed, restoring blood flow to Irene's leg. Irene alleges she continued to suffer severe and significant leg pain even after the graft was performed.
Appellants subsequently filed a complaint in the Fayette Circuit Court alleging the Hospital was "grossly negligent in failing to ascertain... pulses were not present (in Irene's leg) after the catheterization procedure...and for falsely noting in the medical records that said pulses were present." Irene's husband, Keith, claimed loss of consortium.
Following a four-day jury trial, a verdict was returned in favor of the hospital and judgment was entered thereafter on July 2, 2003, dismissing appellants' complaint. This appeal follows.
Appellants contend the jury instructions did not adequately identify the duty of care owed by the Hospital. The jury was instructed, pursuant to the instruction submitted by the Hospital, as follows:
It was the duty of Defendant, Baptist Healthcare System, Inc.[,] d/b/a Central Baptist Hospital, acting by a through its nurse employees, to use that degree of care and skill ordinarily expected of reasonably competent nurse under the same or similar circumstances as described in the evidence of this case. Appellants submitted the following jury instruction, which was not given to the jury:
The Court instructs they jury, having heard the arguments and testimonies of all the Parties and their witnesses, that upon the occasion that is the subject of this trial, it was the duty of Defendant CENTRAL BAPTIST HOSPITAL and its employees to operate their facility exercising that standard of care required of such facilities for the safety of its patients, said duty to include the following specific duties:
(1) To operate the facility in a careful manner with due regard and diligence regarding the safety and health of its patients;
(2) To keep and maintain a proper observation of its patients by properly trained personnel;
(3) To obey and follow all the facility's policies and procedures;
(4) To give proper and just attention to complaints, comments and observations made by the patients and to make appropriate records;
(5) To report to the necessary person or persons significant problems or complaints;
(6) To properly staff the facility; and
(7) To ensure that its personnel performed all of their duties as required by law, the facility's own policies and procedures, and according to the applicable standard of care for such personnel.
From the evidence presented, does the jury believe that Defendant BAPTIST HOSPITAL failed to fulfill any one or more of the duties imposed upon them by Instruction No. 1 and that such failures on their part was a substantial factor in causing the Plaintiff's injuries?
Page 1 2 3 Kentucky Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|