 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Gomez v. Valley Baptist Medical Center5/26/2005
Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Rodriguez and Garza
This is an appeal from a medical malpractice suit brought by appellants, Yolanda Gomez and Jose Luis Rosales, against appellees, Valley Baptist Medical Center, Christopher Hansen, M.D., and Donald Vargas, M.D. We affirm.
Background
Appellants' daughter, Erica Rosales Romero, was seriously injured in an automobile accident and was admitted to Valley Baptist Medical Center on July 5, 1998. Erica required major orthopedic surgery for her injuries. Dr. Hansen was the chief surgeon in the hospital at the time, and Dr. Vargas was the orthopedic surgeon on site. After initial consultation and tests, Erica's husband, Richard Romero, informed the staff that he did not wish Dr. Vargas to be his wife's surgeon.
During Erica's hospital stay, her neurological condition rapidly deteriorated. Dr. Briones, Valley Baptist's vice president of guest relations, informed Richard that no qualified surgeons other than Dr. Vargas were available at Valley Baptist and that surgery was necessary as soon as possible. Richard changed his mind, and Dr. Vargas was asked to return to the case and prepare Erica for surgery as soon as her condition had adequately stabilized. Meanwhile, a cardiologist requested a transesophogeal exam (TEE) to determine if Erica had an atrial septal defect. The first attempt to perform the TEE failed, and the doctors decided the TEE could be done during the surgery. Dr. Briones scheduled a meeting with Richard in order to obtain his consent to perform the TEE. Richard did not appear for the meeting but ultimately gave his consent when he was reached later.
The day of Richard's scheduled meeting with Dr. Briones, Erica had to be placed on a respirator. The next day she was found to be suffering from fatty embolism syndrome (FES), a condition where bits of fat discharged from fractured bones travel to the lungs and interfere with breathing. Surgery was never performed as Erica's condition continued to deteriorate, and she died a week later of pulmonary failure.
Appellants, Erica's parents, then sued Richard and appellees for negligence and medical malpractice. Before jury impaneling, all claims by and against Richard were non-suited. At the close of plaintiffs' evidence, the trial judge granted directed verdicts in favor of Valley Baptist and Dr. Hansen. The case continued against Dr. Vargas, whom the jury ultimately found not liable.
Appellants raise three issues on appeal: (1) the trial court erroneously excluded evidence regarding Dr. Hansen's breach of the standard of care and therefore erroneously directed a verdict in his favor, (2) the trial court erroneously granted a directed verdict in favor of Valley Baptist as there was evidence of unavailable surgical hardware and a failure to obtain consent, and (3) the trial court erroneously excluded evidence regarding Dr. Vargas's breach of the standard of care and therefore the jury erroneously failed to find liability.
Dr. Hansen
By their first issue, appellants allege that the trial court erroneously excluded expert testimony which would have established that Dr. Hansen breached the medical standard of care.
The trial court granted a motion for a directed verdict in favor of Dr. Hansen. A directed verdict is proper when (1) a defect in the opponent's pleading makes the pleading insufficient to support a judgment, (2) the evidence conclusively proves a fact that establishes a party's right to judgment as a matter of law, or (3) the evidence offered on a cause of action is insufficient to raise an issue of fact. Encina Partnership v. Corenergy, L.L.C., 50 S.W.3d 66
Page 1 2 3 4 5 Texas Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|