Hodge v. Crafts-Farrow State Hosp., a Div. of S.C. Dept. of Mental Health, CRAFTS-FARROW

Citation286 S.C. 437,334 S.E.2d 818
Decision Date23 April 1985
Docket NumberCRAFTS-FARROW,No. 22363,22363
CourtSouth Carolina Supreme Court
PartiesJoseph A. HODGE, Sr., as Executor of the Estate of Katherine W. Hodge, Deceased, Respondent, v.STATE HOSPITAL, A DIVISION OF the S.C. DEPARTMENT OF MENTAL HEALTH, Appellant. . Heard

Douglas McKay, Jr. and R. Howard Grubbs, of McKay, McKay, Grubbs & Nunn, P.A., Columbia, for appellant.

Francis T. Draine, of Draine & McLaren, P.A., Columbia, for respondent.

LITTLEJOHN, Chief Justice.

The Plaintiff-Respondent, Joseph A. Hodge, as Executor of the estate of Katherine W. Hodge, deceased, commenced this action to collect damages for the alleged wrongful death of his 61-year-old wife from the Defendant-Appellant, Crafts-Farrow State Hospital (a state-owned institution) and against the State Commissioner of Mental Health, Dr. William S. Hall and against Richland Memorial Hospital. Both Dr. Hall and the Richland Memorial Hospital were dismissed prior to the trial. The jury returned a verdict in favor of the Executor. We reverse.

The gravamen of the Executor's tort action as taken from his brief is that Crafts-Farrow acted "... negligently by removing Respondent's decedent from her bed at a time when she was gravely ill, to give her a shower or tub bath during which she fell and struck her head." There were a total of sixteen allegations of negligence in the complaint. The answer of Crafts-Farrow asserts that the deceased was suffering from Alzheimer's Disease and in essence amounts to a general denial.

At appropriate stages of the trial, motions for non-suit and for a directed verdict were made by Crafts-Farrow and were denied. Crafts-Farrow alleges the denials constituted error. While other issues are raised on appeal, our disposition of this one issue will dispose of the entire matter.

The deceased, who had a two-year history of Alzheimer's Disease, was admitted to Crafts-Farrow on October 10, 1979. She died at the Richland Memorial Hospital on July 25, 1980. On July 15, 1980, at about 8:00 in the morning, she was given a bath by a mental health specialist. While being returned to her bed area in a geri chair (a large high chair) she suddenly slumped over and struck her head on the shelf of the chair. Dr. Makapugay became concerned that she may have suffered a head injury. Out of an abundance of precaution, she sent her to the Richland Memorial Hospital for examination and evaluation by Dr. Robert Taylor, a board certified neurologist.

Dr. Taylor conducted a computer axial tomography (known as a CAT scan) examination to determine if there was any evidence of brain injury. Because of the decedent's deteriorated mental condition, it was impossible to communicate with her. Such an examination requires that the patient be completely still. In order to assure immobility, she was sedated with a 5 mg. dose of valium to calm her for the procedure.

The examination revealed no evidence of brain injury other than that resulting from Alzheimer's Disease. Plans were made to return her immediately to Crafts-Farrow when she began to show symptoms of respiratory distress. The condition worsened and she was admitted to the Richland Memorial Hospital as a patient where she died ten days later. The death certificate indicated that the "immediate cause of death was respiratory failure to or as a consequence of severe pneumonia unresponsive to therapy, secondary to aspiration." It was indicated that Alzheimer's Disease was a contributing cause.

Actionable negligence is based upon the breach of duty to do or refrain from doing some particular act. If one...

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 cases
  • Vinson v. Hartley
    • United States
    • South Carolina Court of Appeals
    • October 14, 1996
    ...Id. Actionable negligence is based upon the breach of duty to do or refrain from doing some particular act. Hodge v. Crafts -Farrow State Hosp., 286 S.C. 437, 334 S.E.2d 818 (1985). A breach of duty exists when it is foreseeable that one's conduct may likely injure the person to whom the du......
  • Hurd v. Williamsburg County, 3614.
    • United States
    • South Carolina Court of Appeals
    • March 17, 2003
    ...605 (Ct.App.2001). If one neglects a duty which proximately causes injury to another, recovery is warranted. Hodge v. Crafts-Farrow State Hosp., 286 S.C. 437, 334 S.E.2d 818 (1985); Vinson, 324 S.C. at 400, 477 S.E.2d at Proximate cause requires proof of both causation in fact and legal cau......
  • Massey v. W.R. Grace & Co., 22362
    • United States
    • South Carolina Supreme Court
    • June 7, 1985

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT