Brown v. Warren, et al.
| Docket Number: | 2002-CA-00274-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 10-21-2003 Opinion Author: Irving, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Medical malpractice - Tort Claims Act - Employment status - Liability insurance Judge(s) Concurring: McMillin, C.J., King and Southwick, P.JJ., Bridges, Thomas, Lee, Myers, Chandler and Griffis, JJ. Procedural History: Summary Judgment Nature of the Case: CIVIL - MEDICAL MALPRACTICE |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 01-15-2002 Appealed from: Hinds County Circuit Court Judge: W. Swan Yerger Disposition: SUMMARY JUDGMENT FOR APPELLEES. Case Number: 94-934 CIV |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Hattie Pearl Brown |
DANA J. SWAN |
||
| Appellee: | Edward T. Warren, M.D. and Carolyn L. Bigelow, M.D. | JOSEPH L. MCNAMARA STEPHEN P. KRUGER JAN F. GADOW JOHN MICHAEL COLEMAN |
|
|
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: | Medical malpractice - Tort Claims Act - Employment status - Liability insurance |
| Summary of the Facts: | Hattie Brown filed a medical malpractice suit against Drs. Edward Warren and Carolyn Bigelow. The doctors filed a motion for summary judgment which the court granted. Brown appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Employment status Brown first argues that the court erred when it granted sovereign immunity to Dr. Warren for any alleged acts of negligence occurring before September 16, 1992, because no sovereign immunity existed or was in effect during this period of treatment. Although the case of Presley v. Mississippi State Highway Commission, 608 So. 2d 1288 (Miss. 1992) held that sovereign immunity would not be extended beyond the date of the decision which was August 31, 1992, the Court in Mississippi Transportation Commission v. Allday, 726 So. 2d 563, 566 (Miss. 1998) held that the Presley ruling did not become effective until the petition for rehearing was denied which was December 3, 1992. Therefore, sovereign immunity was available to Drs. Warren and Bigelow throughout the period of their treatment of Brown. Brown also argues that the court erred in determining that the doctors were employees of the University of Mississippi Medical Center and not independent contractors. The criteria for determining whether a physician employed at UMMC is an employee or an independent contractor include the nature of the function performed by the employee; the extent of the state's interest and involvement in the function; the degree of control and direction exercised by the state over the employee; whether the act complained of involved the use of judgment and discretion; and whether the physician received compensation, either directly or indirectly, from the patient for professional services rendered. Drs. Warren's and Bigelow's duties in their capacity as professors with UMMC included classroom and practical instruction of medical students and residents, treatment of patients at UMMC and affiliate sites, and other duties as assigned by UMMC. The services provided by the doctors to Brown including providing cardiovascular treatment and surgery and services relating to her blood circulation were within the operational purposes of the hospital. Although the doctors made the necessary medical decisions regarding Brown's treatment, the Board of Trustees of State Institutions of Higher Learning exercised a reasonable amount of control over Drs. Warren and Bigelow. The fact that Drs. Warren and Bigelow exercised their professional judgment and discretion through their teaching and in their treatment of patients does not mean that they are independent contractors. There is no evidence that either Dr. Bigelow or Dr. Warren, directly or indirectly, billed the government for the services that they rendered to Brown. The un-controverted evidence is that the doctors were employees of UMMC. Brown has failed to overcome the presumption that Drs. Warren and Bigelow were acting within the course and scope of their employment. Issue 2: Liability insurance Brown argues that the existence of liability insurance waives Dr. Warren’s and Dr. Bigelow’s immunity to the extent of their coverage. There is no merit to her argument. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
