Fiedler v. Steger, No. 85-185
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of Wyoming |
| Writing for the Court | Before THOMAS, C.J., BROWN, CARDINE and URBIGKIT, JJ., and GUTHRIE; URBIGKIT |
| Citation | 713 P.2d 773 |
| Parties | Elizabeth L. FIEDLER, Edwin G. Fiedler and Katherine Elizabeth Fiedler and Douglas Glenroy Fiedler, by and through their next friends Elizabeth L. Fiedler and Edwin G. Fiedler, Appellants (Plaintiffs), v. David J. STEGER, Appellee (Defendant). |
| Decision Date | 30 January 1986 |
| Docket Number | No. 85-185 |
Page 773
v.
David J. STEGER, Appellee (Defendant).
Edwin G. Fiedler, Laramie, pro se, appeared in oral argument; Cary R. Alburn III, Laramie, filed a brief (but was permitted to withdraw as counsel prior to oral argument), for appellants.
David E. Westling, Casper, appeared in oral argument; Ann Rochelle of Vlastos & Brooks, P.C., Casper, filed a brief, for appellee.
Before THOMAS, C.J., BROWN, CARDINE and URBIGKIT, JJ., and GUTHRIE, J., Retired.
URBIGKIT, Justice.
Appellant Elizabeth Fiedler, seven and one-half months pregnant, who was in fact suffering from appendicitis, and without personal examination, was prescribed an antinausea medication over the telephone by appellee Dr. Steger. Her appendix eventually ruptured and was removed several weeks after she delivered her baby
Page 774
prematurely. In the resulting medical malpractice action against Dr. Steger for misdiagnosis, a motion for summary judgment was sustained, and we will now affirm.Mrs. Fiedler telephoned her doctor's office on September 7, 1982, to complain of nausea and other symptoms. Dr. Steger was the physician on call; his associate in a medical practice was Mrs. Fiedler's regular doctor. By telephone, and without personal contact, Dr. Steger prescribed phenergan, an antinausea drug, for injection at the Riverton Memorial Hospital emergency room. After the injection, Mrs. Fiedler apparently felt better; she was not examined by Dr. Steger, nor were other arrangements made for her to be seen by any doctor.
Early in the morning of September 9, 1982, emergency room personnel at the hospital contacted Dr. Steger by telephone, since Mrs. Fiedler had then returned to the emergency room with similar complaints of nausea and other symptoms. Again, Dr. Steger prescribed phenergan over the telephone, and did not conduct any personal examination. Later that day, her regular doctor, Dr. Kent Stockton, 1 examined her, determined that premature labor and delivery were imminent, and arranged transportation from Riverton, Wyoming, to the University of Utah Medical Center in Salt Lake City, Utah, where she delivered a premature baby. No diagnosis of appendicitis was made either by Dr. Stockton or the group of doctors participating in the delivery in Utah.
Mrs. Fiedler's pain continued after the delivery, when she returned to her home in Riverton. Later that month, exploratory surgery revealed that she had suffered a ruptured appendix which had consequently abscessed. Extensive treatment followed.
Mrs. Fiedler, her husband and their children filed this medical malpractice action against Dr. Steger, alleging misdiagnosis and failure to examine and properly treat. Steger filed a motion for summary judgment with supporting affidavits, and, by motion, Fiedler arranged for her expert to testify orally at the summary-judgment hearing.
The issue of the case, simply stated, is the propriety of the entry of summary judgment.
Summary judgment is properly granted when there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Rule 56(c), W.R.C.P.; Greaser v. Williams, Wyo., 703 P.2d 327 (1985); Rompf v. John Q. Hammons Hotels, Inc., Wyo., 685 P.2d 25 (1984); Matter of Estate of Brosius, Wyo., 683 P.2d 663 (1984).
A succinct and conclusive critique of the Wyoming summary-judgment law is afforded by the court in Garner v. Hickman, 709 P.2d 407 (1985):
"When reviewing a summary...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Cordova v. Gosar, No. 85-271
...for hearing was properly noticed and held in accord with Rule 56. Torrey v. Twiford, Wyo., 713 P.2d 1160 (1986); Fiedler v. Steger, Wyo., 713 P.2d 773 (1986); Hickey v. Burnett, Wyo., 707 P.2d 741 (1985); Kimbley v. City of Green River, Wyo., 642 P.2d 443 Stage Three: sufficiency of the mov......
-
England v. Simmons, No. 86-74
...cases on proximate cause or cause in fact include: Zanetti Bus Lines, Inc. v. Hurd, 320 F.2d 123 (10th Cir.1963); Fiedler v. Steger, Wyo., 713 P.2d 773 (1986); Noonan v. Texaco Inc., Wyo., 713 P.2d 160 (1986); State v. Dieringer, Wyo., 708 P.2d 1 (1985); Brockett v. Prater, supra; Beard v. ......
-
Mostert v. CBL & Associates, No. 86-220
...noted that " * * * [t]he initial burden is on the movant to show that there is no genuine issue of material fact. Fiedler v. Steger, Wyo., 713 P.2d 773 (1986). Once that showing is made, it is incumbent upon the party opposing the motion to come forward with specific facts to show that ther......
-
Century Ready-Mix Co. v. Campbell County School Dist., READY-MIX
...CAUSE Proximate cause means the accident or injury must be the natural and probable cause of the act of negligence. Fiedler v. Steger, 713 P.2d 773 (Wyo.1986); McClellan v. Tottenhoff, 666 P.2d 408 (Wyo.1983). As cited earlier, " '[p]roximate cause is normally a question of fact unless the ......
-
Cordova v. Gosar, 85-271
...for hearing was properly noticed and held in accord with Rule 56. Torrey v. Twiford, Wyo., 713 P.2d 1160 (1986); Fiedler v. Steger, Wyo., 713 P.2d 773 (1986); Hickey v. Burnett, Wyo., 707 P.2d 741 (1985); Kimbley v. City of Green River, Wyo., 642 P.2d 443 Stage Three: sufficiency of the mov......
-
England v. Simmons, 86-74
...cases on proximate cause or cause in fact include: Zanetti Bus Lines, Inc. v. Hurd, 320 F.2d 123 (10th Cir.1963); Fiedler v. Steger, Wyo., 713 P.2d 773 (1986); Noonan v. Texaco Inc., Wyo., 713 P.2d 160 (1986); State v. Dieringer, Wyo., 708 P.2d 1 (1985); Brockett v. Prater, supra; Beard v. ......
-
Mostert v. CBL & Associates, 86-220
...noted that " * * * [t]he initial burden is on the movant to show that there is no genuine issue of material fact. Fiedler v. Steger, Wyo., 713 P.2d 773 (1986). Once that showing is made, it is incumbent upon the party opposing the motion to come forward with specific facts to show that ther......
-
Century Ready-Mix Co. v. Campbell County School Dist., READY-MIX
...CAUSE Proximate cause means the accident or injury must be the natural and probable cause of the act of negligence. Fiedler v. Steger, 713 P.2d 773 (Wyo.1986); McClellan v. Tottenhoff, 666 P.2d 408 (Wyo.1983). As cited earlier, " '[p]roximate cause is normally a question of fact unless the ......