Delta Reg'l Med. Ctr v. Venton
| Docket Number: | 2004-CA-02208-SCT | |
| Supreme Court: | Opinion Link Opinion Date: 09-13-2007 Opinion Author: LAMAR, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Negligence - Standard of review - Sufficiency of evidence - Damages Judge(s) Concurring: Smith, C.J., Waller and Diaz, P.JJ., Easley, Carlson, Graves, Dickinson and Randolph, JJ. Procedural History: Bench Trial Nature of the Case: CIVIL - MEDICAL MALPRACTICE |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 09-16-2004 Appealed from: WASHINGTON COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT Judge: Margaret Carey-McCray Disposition: A bench trial was held pursuant to the Mississippi Tort Claims Act. Upon completion of the trial proceedings, the trial judge found by a preponderance of the evidence that negligent acts and/or omissions of the nursing staff and other employees and personnel of DRMC in failing to adequately turn and reposition Hattie Venton, and in failing to provide proper hydration, were proximate contributing causes of the skin breakdown, decubitus ulcer development, regression and the death of Hattie Venton. Case Number: CI20-0074 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | DELTA REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER |
ROBERT R. STEPHENSON
L. CARL HAGWOOD |
||
| Appellee: | MICHAEL VENTON, INDIVIDUALLY AND ON BEHALF OF ALL THOSE ENTITLED TO RECOVER FOR THE WRONGFUL DEATH OF HATTIE VENTON | MICHAEL M. WILLIAMS TYVESTER GOSS |
|
|
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: | Negligence - Standard of review - Sufficiency of evidence - Damages |
| Summary of the Facts: | Hattie Venton was admitted to the Intensive Care Unit at Delta Regional Medical Center. Approximately ten days after arriving at Delta Regional, Venton developed a decubitus ulcer on her coccyx that ultimately expanded into a wound measuring six by ten inches. Venton was transferred from DRMC to HealthSouth, a Louisiana rehabilitation facility, where the bedsore began to heal. She later died. Charles Venton, Hattie Venton’s son, brought a wrongful death claim against DRMC and ten unnamed staff members. The court awarded Venton’s estate $1,000,000 in damages, with $500,000 assessed against DRMC. This amount was reduced to $250,000 under the Tort Claims Act, but was again increased to $500,000, the amount of DRMC’s insurance coverage. DRMC appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Standard of review The standard by which an appellate court reviews factual determinations made by a trial judge sitting without a jury is the substantial evidence standard. DRMC argues that the Court should conduct a de novo review because several of Venton’s submitted findings of fact and conclusions of law were adopted verbatim by the trial court. The Court will deviate from a deferential standard only when, as precedence suggests, only one party’s findings of fact are adopted in toto. As this record reflects a collaboration of both parties’ facts and conclusions, along with original determinations from the trial court itself, the substantial evidence standard will be applied. Issue 2: Sufficiency of evidence DRMC argues that Venton failed to prove the elements of breach and causation in this medical negligence action, thus it was entitled to a directed verdict. The plaintiff presented two experts, and DRMC argues that the bulk of their conclusions were unsupported and contradictory to the records. While one of the experts did admit that only a physician could have ordered the pain medication, nutritional supplements, and special pressure-relieving bed that Venton required, the trial court allocated fault in these particular areas to the physicians, not DRMC, in its findings of fact. The trial court’s opinion was that DRMC’s liability was entirely based upon the failure to turn Venton and provide her with proper hydration. Based upon the evidence, the element of breach was sufficiently established. With regard to causation, there was a conflict of expert medical opinion. In such a case, it is within the province of the fact-finder to determine the cause of death. Issue 3: Damages DRMC argues that the $1,000,000 judgment was excessive and against the overwhelming weight of the evidence. For a defendant to be entitled to a reduction, such damages must be so excessive as to strike mankind, at first blush, as being, beyond all measure, unreasonable, and outrageous, and such as manifestly show the jury to have been actuated by passion, partiality, prejudice, or corruption. While in the care of DRMC, Venton developed a bedsore measuring six by ten inches in diameter. By the time Venton left DRMC, the ulcer was large enough that a volleyball could be placed inside it. Although both parties agreed that the standard of care mandates turning a patient every two hours, the medical records show that Delta Regional failed to meet this benchmark during the majority of Venton’s stay, even after she first developed a skin tear. Testimony revealed that Venton experienced substantial pain and suffering from the time she entered the facility until her death. Comparing amounts deemed suitable in other negligence cases, an award of $1,000,000 is not outrageous. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
