Dornak v. Lafayette General Hospital, 6888

• Court: Court of Appeal of Louisiana (US)
• Writing for the Court: WATSON
• Citation: 368 So.2d 1185
• Parties: Raymond DORNAK, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. LAFAYETTE GENERAL HOSPITAL et al., Defendants-Appellees.
• Docket Number: No. 6888,6888
• Decision Date: 07 March 1979

Page 1185

368 So.2d 1185 Raymond DORNAK, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
LAFAYETTE GENERAL HOSPITAL et al., Defendants-Appellees. No. 6888. Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Third Circuit. March 7, 1979.

Page 1186

Edward J. Milligan, Jr., Lafayette, for plaintiff-appellant.

Onebane, Donohoe, Bernard, Torian, Diaz, McNamara & Abell, Timothy J. McNamara, Lafayette, for defendants-appellees.

Before WATSON, SWIFT and STOKER, JJ.

WATSON, Judge.

This is an appeal by plaintiff, Raymond Dornak, from a trial court judgment dismissing his suit against defendants, William Grun, Lafayette General Hospital and Continental Insurance Company, for failure to state a cause of action.

The petition alleges that Grun, an employee of the Lafayette General Hospital, the hospital and its insurer are liable to plaintiff for medical expenses and loss of earnings resulting from failure to inform plaintiff's wife that an x-ray taken at her preemployment physical disclosed a tubercular condition. It alleges that William Grun, acting within the course and scope of his employment at Lafayette General Hospital, was negligent: in failing to advise Ms. Dornak to return for further x-rays; failing to advise her of her condition; failing to inform her of the physician's report concerning the x-ray, with its serious implications; and failing to make further examinations and tests. It further alleges that, following the x-ray in August of 1974, the result of which was reported to the hospital, Ms. Dornak was employed as a nurse's aide at the hospital; that Ms. Dornak, therefore, assumed she was in good health and neglected to seek medical attention until she was hospitalized on May 26, 1977. It also states that she first discovered defendants' negligence in 1977 when she was told her tuberculosis was apparent on the x-ray taken in August of 1974.

The exception of no cause of action asserts that defendants did not undertake medical care, treatment or diagnosis of Ms. Dornak's illness and therefore owed no duty to her in connection with her alleged condition in August of 1974.

It is fundamental that:

"No evidence may be introduced at any time to support or controvert the objection that the petition fails to state a cause of action." LSA-C.C.P. art. 931.

The exception presents the question of whether, conceding the facts alleged to be true, the law affords a remedy to plaintiff. Kird v. New Orleans & N. W. R. Co., 105 La. 226, 29 So. 729 (1901).

While it is true that LSA-R.S. 23:13...