Lamont v. Brookwood Health Services, Inc.
Decision Date | 09 December 1983 |
Citation | 446 So.2d 1018 |
Parties | Nell LAMONT v. BROOKWOOD HEALTH SERVICES, INC., et al. 82-874. |
Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
Larry R. Grissett of Prestwood, Prestwood & Grissett, Andalusia, for appellant.
Larry W. Harper of Porterfield, Scholl, Bainbridge, Mims & Harper, Birmingham, for appellees.
Nell Lamont appeals from the summary judgment entered in behalf of Brookwood Health Services, Inc., in her action for damages resulting from the allegedly negligent failure of Brookwood to care for her before, during and after surgery. The action remains pending against other defendants. A proper Rule 54(b), ARCP, order was entered as a part of the summary judgment.
It is Lamont's contention that her counter-affidavit, which also incorporated a transcript of her oral deposition, shows the existence of a genuine issue of material fact, the negligence vel non of Brookwood's servant, agents, or employees, and entry of summary judgment was inappropriate. We agree.
Nell Lamont was admitted to Brookwood Hospital for the purpose of having a surgical procedure performed known as a jejunoileal by-pass designed to alleviate morbid obesity. In her oral deposition, and by affidavit, she says she had attended nursing school, had been employed in hospitals, understands certain standards required of nurses and other staff personnel in a hospital, and further, the following:
Brookwood's motion for summary judgment was submitted upon the pleadings and the deposition of Dr. A.G. Lemmon (Lamont's surgeon). Brookwood contends that the testimony of Dr. Lemmon indicates that no genuine issue of material fact exists and further that his opinion that Brookwood conformed to the standard of care exercised by other hospitals in the general area as required by § 6-5-484, Code 1975. To exemplify its position in that regard, Brookwood referred the trial court to the following:
We opine that the materials upon which the motion was submitted, taken with the evidence offered by Lamont, are sufficient to demonstrate that genuine issues of material fact present in this case require reversal of the summary judgment. At the least, Lamont's evidence shows that as to basic standards of nursing and hospital care, she was sufficiently expert to make an issue of fact as to whether Brookwood departed from those standards in its care and treatment of her as its patient. E.g., see Baker v. Chastain, 389 So.2d 932 (Ala.1980). Among other things, the evidence showed she had received training both as a licensed practical...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Ex parte HealthSouth Corp.
...(plaintiff uses recognized standard or authoritative medical text or treatise to prove proper practice); Lamont v. Brookwood Health Servs., Inc., 446 So.2d 1018 (Ala.1983) (plaintiff is himself or herself a medical expert qualified to evaluate allegedly negligent conduct). After the Legisla......
-
Gess v. U.S.
...under Alabama law, a hospital owes a general duty of care to its patients. See § 6-5-484 Ala.Code (1993);33 Lamont v. Brookwood Health Servs. Inc., 446 So.2d 1018, 1020 (Ala.1983). More precisely, the defendant owed the plaintiffs a duty to "exercise that degree of care, skill, and diligenc......
-
Haney v. Mizell Memorial Hosp.
...examined the authority he relies on as justification for now raising this issue.Haney refers us to Lamont v. Brookwood Health Servs., Inc., 446 So.2d 1018 (Ala.1983) (plurality opinion), in support of his argument that the trial court erred in initially ruling that defendant Mizell Memorial......
-
Jawad v. Granade
...to what is or is not the proper practice, treatment, or procedure. Holt v. Godsil, 447 So.2d 191 (Ala.1984); Lamont v. Brookwood Health Services, Inc., 446 So.2d 1018 (Ala.1983). Likewise, the jury could rely on the testimony of the defendant physician, who was duly qualified as a medical e......