Maxie v. Laurel General Hospital

• Decision Date: 20 November 1922
• Docket Number: 22855
• Citation: 130 Miss. 246,93 So. 817
• Court: Mississippi Supreme Court
• Parties: MAXIE et al. v. LAUREL GENERAL HOSPITAL

93 So. 817

130 Miss. 246

MAXIE et al. v. LAUREL GENERAL HOSPITAL

No. 22855

Supreme Court of Mississippi

November 20, 1922

1 HOSPITALS. Conducted for private gain liable for injury to patient caused by negligence of employees.

The business of a hospital for the sick and afflicted, conducted for private gain, carries with it an implied obligation to give the patients therein reasonable care and attention; and such a hospital so conducted is liable for an injury received by a patient therein resulting from the negligence of its employees.

2. HOSPITALS. Whether death of eight year old patient, who fell from bed after operation resulted from negligence of employees held for jury.

Where a child eight years of age in such a hospital, shortly after being operated on for appendicitis, was left by the employees of said hospital in a ward therein without an attendant or any means of calling assistance and while so situated for some reason fell from its bed, and its temperature soon thereafter rose rapidly, and in a few hours it died, the question of liability for such injury and death was one for the jury and not the court; therefore in such a case the court erred in directing a verdict for the hospital.

HON. R S. HALL, Judge.

APPEAL from circuit court of Jones county, HON. R. S. HALL, Judge.

Action by W. L. Maxie and others against the Laurel General Hospital. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiffs appeal. Reversed and remanded.

Reversed and remanded.

A. Q Broadus and Hall & Hall, for appellants.

The first act of negligence charged was that the appellee negligently left Willie Mae Maxie in her bed without any assistance whatever. Dr. W. N. Blunt, the principal owner of the appellee corporation, was introduced as an adverse witness, for cross-examination, and on page 5 of the stenographer's notes he testified that the child needed constant attention, considering its condition. Mrs. Sallie Houston, a witness for appellants, testified as shown by page 23 of the stenographer's notes: "Q. Please tell the jury if there was any nurse or any representative at all of that hospital there when the little girl fell off the bed? A. No nurse or any representative in the ward at the time."

It thus appears from the record that on account of the negligence of the employees of this hospital the little girl did not get the constant attention to which she was entitled and which the appellee well knew she needed, and opposing counsel have not referred the court to any place in the record where testimony was offered tending to show that this constant attention was given. We therefore respectfully insist that it was a question for the jury to say whether or not the appellee was guilty of negligence in leaving the little girl alone and unattended.

We next charged the appellee with negligence in leaving Willie Mae Maxie in her bed without any means of calling for assistance. The record shows that the appellants paid for and were entitled to a call bell at the bed of this little girl, but by reference to page 23 of the stenographer's notes, in the testimony of Mrs. Sallie Houston, as pointed out in our original brief, there was no bell at this little girl's bed when she fell. Considering the condition of this patient as admitted by appellee, it was certainly a question for the jury to say whether or not it was negligence on the part of appellee in failing to provide any means whereby the patient might call for assistance; it was for the jury to say whether or not the failure to provide the call bell contributed to the death of the little girl.

We next charged that the appellee was negligent in denying the parents of Willie Mae Maxie the right to be present to see that her needs were furnished. On page 10 and again on page 11 of the stenographer's notes, Mr. Maxie testified that Miss Magee, superintendent of nurses, ordered him out of the room occupied by his daughter. On page 38 Mr. Webster Walters testified that Miss Magee, the superintendent, put Mr. Maxie out of the room three different times. On page 76, Miss Magee denies this. Thus there was created a disputed question of fact for the determination of the jury. In the face of the fact that the appellee left this little girl without any assistance whatever, and the further fact that it did not provide any means of calling for assistance, and taking into consideration the fact that Dr Blunt, the principal stockholder in the corporation, knew that the child required constant attention, then certainly there can be no question but that it was negligence of the grossest type to deny this little girl's father the right to stay with her when the nurses were away and when she had no means of calling for help. The granting of the peremptory instruction was therefore manifest error, as the case should have been submitted to the jury so that the issues and...