Cleveland, et al. v. Hamil
| Docket Number: | 2010-CT-01527-SCT Linked Case(s): 2010-CA-01527-COA ; 2010-CA-01527-COA ; 2010-CT-01527-SCT |
|
| Supreme Court: | Opinion Link Opinion Date: 08-08-2013 Opinion Author: Dickinson, P.J. Holding: Court of Appeals affirmed in part, reversed in part; Circuit court reversed and rendered. |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Wrongful death - Medical malpractice - Expert testimony - Standard of care - Discovery violation Judge(s) Concurring: Waller, C.J., Randolph, P.J., Lamar, Kitchens, Chandler, Pierce, King and Coleman, JJ. Procedural History: Jury Trial Nature of the Case: CIVIL - WRONGFUL DEATH Writ of Certiorari: Granted Appealed from Court of Appeals |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 06-07-2010 Appealed from: Hinds County Circuit Court Judge: Winston Kidd Disposition: JURY VERDICT OF $1,128,050 IN FAVOR OF APPELLEE Case Number: 251-07-34CIV |
|
| Note: | The Supreme Court held that the trial judge erred in allowing Dr. Silverman to testify to undisclosed opinions. The Supreme Court further held that because the plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case with admissible evidence, the trial judge erred in failing to grant Dr. Cleveland judgment notwithstanding the verdict. It then reversed the judgment of the Court of Appeals in part and reversed the judgment of the Hinds County Circuit Court, and rendered judgment for all defendants. The original Court of Appeals opinion can be found at http://courts.ms.gov/Images/Opinions/CO79478.pdf | |
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | Brief(s) Available: | ||
| Appellant: | Ken E. Cleveland, George T. Smith-Vaniz, M.D., and Jackson HMA, Inc., d/b/a Central Mississippi Medical Center |
WHITMAN B. JOHNSON, III
MICHAEL F. MYERS
LORRAINE WALTERS BOYKIN
STEPHEN P. KRUGER
JAN F. GADOW
KRISTOPHER ALAN GRAHAM
MARK P. CARAWAY
CORY LOUIS RADICIONI |
||
| Appellee: | Lanell Hamil, Individually and on Behalf of the Wrongful Death Beneficiaries of Emmett O. Hamil, Deceased, who are Entitled to Recover Under the Wrongful Death and Survival Statute | ALTON EARL PETERSON LARRY STAMPS ANITA M. STAMPS |
|
|
Synopsis provided by:  If you are interested in subscribing to the weekly synopses of all Mississippi Supreme Court and Court of Appeals hand downs please contact Tammy Upton in the MLI Press office. |
|
| Topic: | Wrongful death - Medical malpractice - Expert testimony - Standard of care - Discovery violation |
| Summary of the Facts: | Emmett Hamil was admitted to Central Mississippi Medical Center, complaining of severe abdominal pain. Dr. George Smith-Vaniz, a gastroenterologist, treated Hamil for gastrointestinal bleeding, and Dr. Ken Cleveland, a cardiovascular surgeon, surgically repaired his ulcer. After Hamil was discharged, he returned to the hospital complaining of further stomach pain and bleeding. Surgery revealed a second ulcer, which had eroded a large blood vessel and precipitated Hamil’s death. Lanell Hamil filed suit, alleging that the medical malpractice of Dr. Smith-Vaniz, Dr. Cleveland, and Jackson HMA caused the wrongful death of her husband. At the close of the plaintiff’s case-in-chief, the circuit court denied a motion for a directed verdict by Dr. Smith-Vaniz, but granted a directed verdict in favor of Jackson HMA except for any vicarious liability it had through Dr. Smith-Vaniz. The jury returned a verdict in favor of the plaintiff against all three defendants. The Court of Appeals reversed the judgment against all three defendants and rendered judgment for Dr. Smith-Vaniz. Further, because Jackson HMA was only vicariously liable for any negligence of Dr. Smith-Vaniz, the court rendered judgment in its favor. The Court remanded the case for a new trial against Dr. Cleveland. Dr. Cleveland filed a petition for writ of certiorari, which the Supreme Court granted. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | In order to establish a prima facie case of medical malpractice, a plaintiff must prove the existence of a duty by the defendant to conform to a specific standard of conduct for the protection of others against an unreasonable risk of injury; a failure to conform to the required standard; and an injury to the plaintiff proximately caused by the breach of such duty by the defendant. To establish that the defendant breached the applicable standard of care and that the breach proximately caused plaintiff’s injuries, the plaintiff must provide expert testimony. Here, the Court of Appeals erred by not rendering judgment in favor of Dr. Cleveland. While the plaintiff’s expert was qualified as an expert in cardiovascular surgery, his testimony concerning Dr. Cleveland’s breach of the standard of care consisted entirely of a new theory that the plaintiff did not disclose. The trial judge erred in allowing the expert witness to testify to undisclosed opinions. And because the plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case with admissible evidence, the trial judge erred in failing to grant Dr. Cleveland judgment notwithstanding the verdict. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
