373 N.E.2d 159 (Ind. 1978), 777S524, Dahlberg v. Ogle

Docket Nº:777S524.
Citation:373 N.E.2d 159, 268 Ind. 30
Party Name:Donna DAHLBERG, as Administratrix of the Estate of Leslie R. Dahlberg, Jr., Deceased, Appellant, v. Dr. Robert OGLE and Dr. Francisco D. Deogracias, Appellees.
Case Date:March 09, 1978
Court:Supreme Court of Indiana

Page 159

373 N.E.2d 159 (Ind. 1978)

268 Ind. 30

Donna DAHLBERG, as Administratrix of the Estate of Leslie R.

Dahlberg, Jr., Deceased, Appellant,

v.

Dr. Robert OGLE and Dr. Francisco D. Deogracias, Appellees.

No. 777S524.

Supreme Court of Indiana.

March 9, 1978

Page 160

[268 Ind. 32] Morris L. Klapper, Ricos, Wade & Price, Indianapolis, for appellant.

Jon D. Krahulik, Richard J. Darko, Indianapolis, for appellee Ogle.

Page 161

Geoffrey Segar, Indianapolis, for appellee Deogracias.

DeBRULER, Justice.

Appellant, Donna Dahlberg, as administratrix of the estate of her husband Leslie Dahlberg, Jr., instituted this suit, maintaining that her husband's death was the proximate result of the negligence of the two defendant medical doctors. At the end of the plaintiff's evidence a motion of the defendant Dr. Ogle for judgment on the evidence was granted. The case went to the jury against the remaining defendant Dr. Deogracias and a verdict for him was returned. Plaintiff appealed and this Court granted transfer with an opinion found at 364 N.E.2d 1174.

On the evening of January 13, 1971, Mr. Dahlberg complained to his wife that he was having stomach pains. The following day the pain continued and he became acutely ill with nausea, vomiting, diarrhea and occasional fever. On the morning of January 18 he took himself to the office of the defendant Dr. Ogle, a general practitioner who examined him and made a diagnosis of acute gastroenteritis and ordered medication accordingly. Twenty-four hours later on the morning of January 19 Dr. Ogle examined him again in the office and concluded that he had a ruptured organ in the abdomen and peritonitis. Dr. Ogle admitted him to the Johnson County Memorial Hospital that morning, and there by referral he was examined by the defendant Dr. Deogracias, a surgeon who [268 Ind. 33] made a working diagnosis of peritonitis as secondary to a ruptured organ. Mr. Dahlberg remained in the hospital for eleven days during which time he was not operated on. On January 29 in response to pending renal failure he was transferred to Methodist Hospital in Indianapolis, Indiana, where under the care of different doctors, after having received further treatment including more than one surgical operation, he died on February 24, 1971. The immediate cause of death was renal failure and gramnegative sepsis occasioned by peritonitis, which in turn was probably the result of a breach of the intestine which permitted fecal matter to leak out. The site from which the peritonitis first developed was never determined.

I.

Appellant first contends that the trial court erroneously granted the motion of the defendant Ogle for judgment on the evidence at the close of her case. The motion is governed by Ind.R.Tr.P. 50, and such motions are properly granted at the conclusion of the plaintiff's case where some or all of the essential issues being litigated are not supported by sufficient evidence.

Appellant's claim below against Ogle was presented on two separate theories. First, it was sought to be proved that Ogle was individually liable for his own negligent acts and omissions which occurred while he alone was treating the decedent prior to the admission of decedent to the Johnson County Memorial Hospital. In support of this theory it was alleged that Ogle failed to make a sufficient examination, that he failed to make an adequate diagnosis, and failed to procure necessary expert medical attention for his patient. Second, it was sought to be proved that Ogle was jointly liable with the surgeon Deogracias for negligently withholding necessary surgery and in providing inadequate conservative care in the form of drugs.

On first examination on the morning of January 18 Mr. Dahlberg was found to have a generalized soreness in his [268 Ind. 34] abdomen and was hoarse. Defendant Ogle described the examination he made as follows:

"I palpated his abdomen and I listened to it with a stethoscope, and he had bowel sounds, he did not have any point of tenderness, but he had a generalized tenderness in his abdomen."

Ogle testified that Mr. Dahlberg's abdomen was tympanitic and described what that term meant in Mr. Dahlberg's case:

"In this man it meant that his abdomen was swollen and that by palpating it I could determine that it was air. It does not mean that the skin was tight or tense."

Page 162

The doctor further testified that the presence of bowel sounds indicated that the intestinal tract was not paralyzed. The doctor did not take his temperature, pulse or perform any blood or urine tests. He was informed by his nurse that Mr. Dahlberg had been having a fever. Mr. Dahlberg had a history of a...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP
56 practice notes
  • 530 N.E.2d 417 (Ill. 1988), 64467, Reed v. Bascon
    • United States
    • Illinois Supreme Court of Illinois
    • September 22, 1988
    ...specialist or have participated in, controlled, directed, or profited from the specialist's practice. See, e.g., Dahlberg v. Ogle (1978), 268 Ind. 30, 373 N.E.2d 159; Brown v. Bennett (1909), 157 Mich. 654, 122 N.W. 305. Finally, Bascon asserts that the appellate court's decision negates st......
  • 419 N.E.2d 203 (Ind.App. 4 Dist. 1981), 3-1177A297, Stauffer v. Lothamer
    • United States
    • Indiana Court of Appeals of Indiana
    • April 16, 1981
    ...upon the complaining party to show there is evidence in the record to support the giving of the instruction. See Dahlberg v. Ogle, (1978) 268 Ind. 30, 40, 373 N.E.2d 159, 164, 165, citing Davis v. State, (1976) 265 Ind. 476, 478, 355 N.E.2d 836, 838. In addition, insofar as both "wilfu......
  • 435 N.E.2d 1011 (Ind.App. 3 Dist. 1982), 3-781A186, Lystarczyk v. Smits
    • United States
    • Indiana Court of Appeals of Indiana
    • May 26, 1982
    ...of the instruction, (3) the substance of the instruction is covered in another instruction accepted by the court. Dahlberg v. Ogle (1978), 268 Ind. 30, 373 N.E.2d 159, 164-165. The instruction refused by the trial court is as follows: "There was in force an ordinance within the County ......
  • 438 N.E.2d 722 (Ind. 1982), 882S297, Noblesville Casting Div. of TRW, Inc. v. Prince
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court of Indiana
    • August 11, 1982
    ...quoted; it asserts the questions were improper because material facts were both omitted and misstated. In Dahlberg v. Ogle, (1978) 268 Ind. 30, 373 N.E.2d 159, this Court held that hypothetical questions are not improper merely because facts pertinent to the evidence are omitted since a rem......
  • Free signup to view additional results
56 cases
  • 530 N.E.2d 417 (Ill. 1988), 64467, Reed v. Bascon
    • United States
    • Illinois Supreme Court of Illinois
    • September 22, 1988
    ...specialist or have participated in, controlled, directed, or profited from the specialist's practice. See, e.g., Dahlberg v. Ogle (1978), 268 Ind. 30, 373 N.E.2d 159; Brown v. Bennett (1909), 157 Mich. 654, 122 N.W. 305. Finally, Bascon asserts that the appellate court's decision negates st......
  • 419 N.E.2d 203 (Ind.App. 4 Dist. 1981), 3-1177A297, Stauffer v. Lothamer
    • United States
    • Indiana Court of Appeals of Indiana
    • April 16, 1981
    ...upon the complaining party to show there is evidence in the record to support the giving of the instruction. See Dahlberg v. Ogle, (1978) 268 Ind. 30, 40, 373 N.E.2d 159, 164, 165, citing Davis v. State, (1976) 265 Ind. 476, 478, 355 N.E.2d 836, 838. In addition, insofar as both "wilfu......
  • 435 N.E.2d 1011 (Ind.App. 3 Dist. 1982), 3-781A186, Lystarczyk v. Smits
    • United States
    • Indiana Court of Appeals of Indiana
    • May 26, 1982
    ...of the instruction, (3) the substance of the instruction is covered in another instruction accepted by the court. Dahlberg v. Ogle (1978), 268 Ind. 30, 373 N.E.2d 159, 164-165. The instruction refused by the trial court is as follows: "There was in force an ordinance within the County ......
  • 438 N.E.2d 722 (Ind. 1982), 882S297, Noblesville Casting Div. of TRW, Inc. v. Prince
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court of Indiana
    • August 11, 1982
    ...quoted; it asserts the questions were improper because material facts were both omitted and misstated. In Dahlberg v. Ogle, (1978) 268 Ind. 30, 373 N.E.2d 159, this Court held that hypothetical questions are not improper merely because facts pertinent to the evidence are omitted since a rem......
  • Free signup to view additional results