Dobbs v. Smith
| Decision Date | 04 September 1987 |
| Citation | 514 So.2d 871 |
| Parties | John N. DOBBS v. M.D. SMITH. 85-1206. |
| Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
Ralph E. Coleman, Birmingham, for appellant.
Curtis Wright of Dortch, Wright & Russell, Gadsden, for appellee.
This is an appeal from a judgment based on a directed verdict in favor of the defendant, Dr. M.D. Smith. The plaintiff, John N. Dobbs, filed suit against Smith for malpractice in inserting an intraocular lens after a cataract operation. After hearing testimony from the witnesses, including Dobbs and Smith, the trial court granted Smith's motion because Dobbs had failed to make out a prima facie case. We affirm.
The facts of this case are as follows:
Smith is a specialist in ophthalmology. In 1975, he undertook training in the intraocular lens field in Yonworst, Holland. He treated glaucoma and cataracts, but only diagnosed detached retinas. At the time of the operation, he was on the staff of Holy Name of Jesus and Baptist Hospitals in Gadsden. In 1973, it was discovered that he had cataracts and glaucoma. His doctor in Anniston, after discovering he had cataracts and glaucoma, referred him to Smith. In November 1975, Smith informed Dobbs that his cataracts had progressed to the point that something needed to be done about them.
Dobbs went to the hospital on December 28, 1975, and his left eye was operated on the following day. During the surgery, the lens slipped sideways and fell into the eye and Smith retrieved it. Dobbs was originally scheduled to have his right eye operated on the following Wednesday; however, feeling that the first operation was unsuccessful, Dobbs cancelled the second operation. Dobbs testified that since the surgery he has suffered from photophobia and pain.
Smith discovered that Dobbs had a detached retina and referred him to Dr. Levene who sent him to Dr. Lavachek, who operated on the left eye. After Lavachek operated on him, Dobbs suffered a severe attack of glaucoma. Levene later operated on him and removed a cataract on the right eye and operated on both eyes for glaucoma. Dobbs testified that he knew that the operation performed by Smith might not be successful. He testified that he thought if it was unsuccessful, he could just wear contact lenses.
A directed verdict is proper where there is a complete absence of pleading or proof on an issue or issues material to a cause of action. Shellnut v. Randolph County Hospital, 469 So.2d 632 (Ala.Civ.App.1985). The scintilla evidence rule applies to motions for directed verdict, as well as to motions for judgment notwithstanding the verdict. White v. Parker, 345 So.2d 312 (Ala.Civ.App.1977). Therefore, a motion for directed verdict should not be granted if the plaintiff offers so much as a "mere gleam, glimmer, spark, the least evidence, the smallest trace or scintilla" of evidence supporting his theory of the complaint. Quillen v. Quillen, 388 So.2d 985 (Ala.1980). When a directed verdict motion is made, the evidence should be viewed in the light most favorable to the opposing party, and if a reasonable inference can be drawn against the moving party, then the trial court should deny the motion. Turner v. People's Bank of Pell City, 378 So.2d 706 (Ala.1979).
The legal duty imposed upon the doctor is statutorily defined: "to...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Gifford v. Rathman
...(Ala.1990). If thestandard of care is not established, there is no measure by which the defendant's conduct can be gauged. Dobbs v. Smith, 514 So. 2d 871 (Ala. 1987).Pruitt v. Zeiger, 590 So. 2d 236, 237-38 (Ala. 1991)(footnote added). As noted above, defendants have submitted expert opinio......
-
Lollar v. Tankersley
...only through the production of (1) "expert medical testimony as to the proper practice, treatment, or procedure," Dobbs v. Smith, 514 So.2d 871, 872 (Ala.1987), or (2) facts rendering the "lack of skill or care ... so apparent as to be within the comprehension of the average layman. Rosemon......
-
Mobile Infirmary Ass'n v. Tyler
...negligence, the plaintiff must offer expert medical testimony as to the proper practice, treatment, or procedure.' Dobbs v. Smith, 514 So.2d 871, 872 (Ala.1987). Dr. Taylor did not describe a procedure that rises to the level of a standard of care. He merely gave his opinion as to what Dr. ......
-
Iacullo v. United States
...that establishes 1) the appropriate standard of care, Keebler v. Winfield Carraway Hospital, 531 So. 2d 841 (Ala. 1988); Dobbs v. Smith, 514 So. 2d 871 (Ala. 1987), 2) the doctor's deviation from that standard, Keebler; Dobbs, and 3) a proximate causal connection between the doctor's act or......