Clary v. Hospital Authority of City of Marietta, 39535
| Decision Date | 22 May 1962 |
| Docket Number | No. 3,No. 39535,39535,3 |
| Citation | 126 S.E.2d 470,106 Ga.App. 134 |
| Parties | M. T. CLARY, by Next Friend v. HOSPITAL AUTHORITY OF the CITY OF MARIETTA |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Grubbs & Prosser, J. M. Grubbs, Jr., Marietta, for plaintiff in error.
Reed, Ingram & Flournoy, Raymond M. Reed, Scott S. Edwards, Jr., Edwards, Bentley, Awtrey & Bartlett, Marietta, for defendant in error.
Syllabus Opinion by the Court
1. Ordinarily, a physician or surgeon on the staff of a hospital is not an employee of such hospital, and in the absence of allegations that the hospital was negligent in the selection of an unskilful physician or surgeon or that the hospital undertook to direct him in the way and manner of treating the patient, the hospital is not liable for the mere negligent performance of professional services by a physician or surgeon on its staff. Black v. Fischer, 30 Ga.App. 109, 111, 117 S.E. 103. The rule is different with respect to the liability of a noncharitable hospital for the negligence of nurses, orderlies, and other servants employed by it. Piedmont Hospital v. Anderson, 65 Ga.App. 491, 16 S.E.2d 90.
2. A physician or surgeon, being an independent contractor following a separate calling (Schloendorff v. Society of New York Hospital, 211 N.Y. 125, 105 N.E. 92, 52 L.R.A.,N.S., 505, under the rule announced in the first headnote, the mere allegation that the hospital was negligent in allowing or permitting a duly licensed physician or surgeon to practice a branch of surgery or medicine in which he was not specially skilled is not sufficient to render the hospital liable to a patient for injuries inflicted on the patient solely by reason of the negligence of the doctor.
3. Neither is such hospital liable for failure to furnish proper equipment for use by the physician or surgeon in the performance of routine surgical procedure where the petition shows that the use by the doctors of improper equipment (an adult size bronchoscope on an infant) was at a time when no emergency or special urgency required the use of such instrument and the choice of using it or not using it was exclusively that of the physician or surgeon performing the procedure. Emory University v. Porter, 103 Ga.App. 752, 120 S.E.2d 668.
4. The petition in the instant case reduced to its barest essentials alleges that the plaintiff, an infant some two weeks of age at the time of the occurrence complained...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Charter Peachford Behavioral v. Kohout
...303 S.E.2d 486; Murphy v. Clayton County Hosp., 175 Ga.App. 152, 153(1), 333 S.E.2d 15 (1985); Clary v. Hosp. Auth., etc., of Marietta, 106 Ga.App. 134, 135(1), 126 S.E.2d 470 (1962). Where a "`hospital reserve(s) no right to control specific medical techniques employed by the ... doctors, ......
-
Stewart v. Midani, Civ. A. No. C80-161R
...can be found in decisions of earlier vintage. Black v. Fischer, 30 Ga.App. 109, 117 S.E. 103 (1923); Clary v. Hospital Authority of Marietta, 106 Ga.App. 134, 126 S.E.2d 470 (1962). Cf. Jeter v. Davis-Fischer Sanitarium Co., 28 Ga.App. 708, 711, 113 S.E. 29 (1922) (no explicit discussion of......
-
Hill v. Hospital Authority of Clarke County
...statement of a correct principle of law and is substantially the language approved by this court in Clary v. Hospital Authority of the City of Marietta, 106 Ga.App. 134(1), 126 S.E.2d 470. Appellant contends this accepted principle should not have been charged in this case because of the re......
-
Cooper v. Binion
...being on the staff of a hospital does not ordinarily make a physician an employee of the hospital. Clary v. Hosp. Auth. of the City of Marietta, 106 Ga.App. 134-135(1), 126 S.E.2d 470 (1962). Second, the labeling of the physician as an independent contractor in his contract with the hospita......