Lamont v. Highsmith Hospital
| Decision Date | 22 January 1936 |
| Docket Number | 693. |
| Citation | 183 S.E. 376,209 N.C. 839 |
| Parties | LAMONT v. HIGHSMITH HOSPITAL et al. |
| Court | North Carolina Supreme Court |
Appeal from Superior Court, Hoke County; Frizzelle, Judge.
Action by William Lamont against the Highsmith Hospital and others. Verdict and judgment for plaintiff, and defendants appeal.
No error.
Hospital patient held entitled to recover from attending physicians for burn sustained from hot water bottles which were applied to patient's feet following an operation in which the nerves in lower part of body had been temporarily deadened.
Civil action to recover damages for physicians' alleged negligent failure properly to care for plaintiff after an operation for fistula, in which the ""sacral nerve block" was used, temporarily deadening the nerves in the lower part of the body, and hot water bottles applied to plaintiff's feet following said operation, resulting in a third-degree burn on plaintiff's left foot near the base of his little toe from said hot water bottles. The burn reached the bone; necrosis set in and affected the whole system.
Sapp & Sapp, of Greensboro, Oates & Herring, of Fayetteville, and Spruill & Spruill, of Rocky Mount, for appellants.
R. A. Collier, of Statesville, and Varser, McIntyre & Henry, of Lumberton, for appellee.
This is the same case that was before us at the spring term, 1934, opinion filed February 28, 1934, reported in 206 N.C. 111, 173 S.E. 46, to which reference may be had for fuller statement of the facts.
The record is quite voluminous and numerous exceptions have been assigned as error, but a careful perusal of the case leaves us with the impression that no new or novel question of law is presented by the appeal. The learned judge evidently had before him, during the trial, what was said on the former appeal and the case of Nash v. Royster, 189 N.C. 408, 127 S.E. 356. The whole ground was covered in these two opinions, and it would serve no useful purpose to go over it again.
No reversible error has been made to appear; hence the verdict and judgment must be upheld.
No error.
To continue reading
Request your trial