Quinby v. Plumsteadville Family Practice
| Decision Date | 18 October 2006 |
| Citation | 907 A.2d 1061 |
| Parties | Patricia QUINBY, Executrix of the Estate of John Quinby, Deceased v. PLUMSTEADVILLE FAMILY PRACTICE, INC., d/b/a Plumsteadville Family Practice, and Charles Burmeister, M.D., and Millie Welsh, R.N. Appeal of Millie Welsh, R.N. Patricia Quinby, Executrix of the Estate of John Quinby, Deceased v. Plumsteadville Family Practice, Inc., d/b/a Plumsteadville Family Practice, and Charles Burmeister, M.D., and Millie Welsh, R.N. Appeal of Charles Burmeister, M.D. |
| Court | Pennsylvania Supreme Court |
James Michael Doyle, Esq., Post & Schell, P.C., Sheila Ann Haren, Esq., Post & Schell, P.C., Philadelphia, for Millie Welsh.
Eric G. Zajac, Esq., The Zajac Law Firm, L.L.C., Philadelphia, for Patricia Quinby.
William H. Pugh, IV, Esq., Kane, Pugh, Knoell, Troy & Kramer, L.L.P., Norristown, for Plumsteadville Family Practice, Inc., (d/b/a "Plumsteadville Family Practice").
James P. Kilcoyne, Esq., Kilcoyne & Associates, L.L.C., John Joseph Leo, III, Esq., Kilcoyne & Nesbitt, L.L.C., for Charles Burmeister, M.D.
James P. Kilcoyne, Esq., Kilcoyne & Associates, L.L.C., John Joseph Leo, III, Esq., Kilcoyne & Nesbitt, L.L.C., for Charles Burmeister, M.D.
James Michael Doyle, Esq., Sheila Ann Haren, Esq., Post & Schell, P.C., Philadelphia, for Millie Welsh.
BEFORE: CAPPY, C.J., and CASTILLE, NEWMAN, SAYLOR, EAKIN, BAER and BALDWIN, JJ.
John Quinby (Decedent), a quadriplegic, suffered injures, which allegedly eventually resulted in his death, when he fell from an examination table while unattended after a minor operative procedure performed by Dr. Charles Burmeister, assisted by Millie Welsh (Nurse Welsh), in the offices of Plumsteadville Family Practice.1 In the subsequent medical malpractice action filed by his widow and executrix, Patricia Quinby (Quinby), on behalf of his estate, the jury returned a defense verdict.2 The Superior Court directed the grant of judgment notwithstanding the verdict (judgment n.o.v.) in Quinby's favor on liability only, and remanded for a new trial on damages.
This Court granted a general allowance of appeal principally to decide whether the trial court should have permitted invocation of the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur to assist Quinby in meeting her burden of proof, and whether the Superior Court erred in granting judgment n.o.v. in Quinby's favor regarding liability. The general grant of allocatur also encompassed evidentiary questions regarding admission of videotapes of Decedent.
We agree with the Superior Court that the trial court should have permitted the res ipsa loquitur inference of negligence under the facts of this case. We also agree that the plaintiff, Quinby, is entitled to judgment n.o.v. on liability for negligence. We also conclude, however, that, contrary to the Superior Court's conclusion, a factual issue remains regarding whether Defendants' negligence caused Decedent's death within the meaning of the Wrongful Death Act, 42 Pa.C.S. § 8301. Finally, we find that, to the extent it is relevant to damages, the videotape evidence proffered by Quinby and partially disallowed by the trial court and then wholly permitted by the Superior Court, should be admitted into evidence. Accordingly, for the reasons that follow, the order of the Superior Court is affirmed in part and reversed in part, and the case is remanded for a new trial on the wrongful death count and for damages for the survival action based on negligence.
The parties agree that on November 8, 1996, Decedent had a small lesion removed from his head by Dr. Burmeister, assisted by Nurse Welsh, at the office of the Plumsteadville Family Practice.3 In preparation for the procedure, Quinby, Decedent's wife, transferred Decedent from his wheelchair onto an examination table without side rails or restraints. Once she moved Decedent, Quinby left the examination room.
According to Decedent, in a deposition taken before his death, Dr. Burmeister and Nurse Welsh positioned him on the examination table on his right side with a pillow behind his back, under his head and between his knees. Dr. Burmeister then removed the lesion from Decedent's left temple, and, in due course, exited the room. Nurse Welsh also left the room, leaving the door open. Both Dr. Burmeister and Nurse Welsh returned on occasion to check on Decedent; however, at some point, while unattended, Decedent fell from the examination table to the floor, undisputedly suffering injury.4 Decedent testified that he did not know exactly how or why he fell, but that after being left lying on his right side, he felt his body roll to the right and fall to the floor. After hearing the loud noise that resulted from the fall, Nurse Welsh, Dr. Burmeister and other employees discovered Decedent on the floor and helped place him back on the examination table.
Defendants' testified, contrary to Decedent, that from the start of the operation Decedent was placed on his back in the center of the examination table. Following the operation, they claimed Decedent was left in this position and that they then left the room and continued to check on Decedent until they heard a thud and rushed into the room to find him on the floor.5 All agree that Defendants and other employees of the Doctor Burmeister placed Decedent back onto the examination table and rendered prompt care.
Quinby filed a complaint around January 5, 1998 in the Bucks County Court of Common Pleas alleging that Defendants committed professional negligence in their care of Decedent. Quinby alleged that Dr. Burmeister negligently provided medical care to Decedent by failing to position Decedent properly on the examination table, failing to use side rails or another restraining system on the examination table, failing to assess Decedent's fall risk failing to monitor Decedent subsequent to the operative procedure, failing to supervise Nurse Welsh by instructing her to not leave the Decedent, and generally failing to adopt and enforce rules for the safety of patients left on examination tables. Quinby alleged separately that Nurse Welsh was negligent in providing nursing care by failing to position Decedent properly on the examination table, failing to restrain Decedent, failing to assess Decedent's fall risk after the operative procedure, and leaving Decedent unattended. Quinby also brought counts against Defendants for negligent infliction of emotional distress, loss of consortium, and failure to obtain informed consent.6 After Quinby filed the complaint, Decedent died, allegedly from complications arising from the fall, and the parties filed a stipulation to amend the complaint to include a count for wrongful death and reflect the parties' understanding that the complaint transmuted to a survival action upon Decedent's death. Prior to his death, Decedent testified in a pre-trial discovery deposition and in a de bene esse deposition.7
A jury trial was held from January 28, 2003 to February 5, 2003.8 At trial, Quinby presented her case consistent with Decedent's belief that Dr. Burmeister and Nurse Welsh had positioned him on his right side prior to the operative procedure, and left him there until he fell. Quinby called as her expert Bradley Fenton, M.D. Dr. Fenton opined that Defendants had not complied with the standard of care, which required them to ensure that Decedent was left safely and securely on the examination table at all times. Further, Dr. Fenton stated that he was unaware of how, absent extrinsic forces not present in this situation, a quadriplegic could fall from an examination table without there being a breach of the requisite standard of care.9 In any event, Dr. Fenton testified that someone should have stayed in the room with Decedent or he should have been secured to the examination table with side rails or straps. Dr. Fenton concluded that Defendants failed to provide Decedent with a safe environment for the entire time he was in the office. Although Dr. Fenton formed this opinion and wrote his report prior to reviewing Defendants' deposition testimony that they left Decedent on his back, he stated that upon reviewing these depositions, he concluded that they offered nothing to change his opinion or conclusion that someone should have remained in the room with Decedent, or that he should have been placed on a table with rails or straps.
Defendants presented the expert testimony of Joseph Bender, M.D., who asserted that leaving a quadriplegic lying in the center of the examination table would be safe, and there was simply no reason for Dr. Burmeister to expect, given the circumstances and Decedent's past medical history of twenty-five years with no falls in the office, that Decedent would be able to move himself on the table.10 Dr. Bender did testify that notwithstanding a quadriplegic's general inability to move, some quadriplegic's do occasionally have muscle spasms. However, Dr. Bender also testified that he was unaware of any spasm strong enough to throw Decedent's motionless body off the table and onto the floor. Dr. Burmeister in this regard testified that he cared for Decedent since the accident rendering him a quadriplegic nineteen years before, and was unaware that Decedent had ever had muscle spasms.11
During trial, the parties also introduced evidence regarding whether the injuries Decedent sustained as a result of the fall eventually caused his death. Additionally, Quinby sought to introduce the audio portion of a videotape Decedent had made twenty-two months prior to his fall describing his life and interactions with family and friends as a quadriplegic, which Decedent had intended for use as an educational tool for students. Quinby offered that the audio track would allow the jury to hear the strength and character of Decedent's voice and thereby his...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Thierfelder v. Wolfert
...with his patients, or of a want of proper care and skill in the performance of a professional act.” Quinby v. Plumsteadville Family Practice, 589 Pa. 183, 198, 907 A.2d 1061, 1070 (2006).2 As medical malpractice is a form of negligence, to establish a case of professional negligence, (1) th......
-
McDonald-Witherspoon v. City of Phila.
...must provide a medical expert who will testify as to the elements of duty, breach, and causation." Quinby v. Plumsteadville Family Practice, Inc., 589 Pa. 183, 907 A.2d 1061, 1070-71 (2006) (citing Hightower-Warren v. Silk, 548 Pa. 459, 698 A.2d 52, 54 (Pa. 1997) ).The Corizon and MHM Defen......
-
Gross v. Stryker Corp.
...itself,’ is ‘a shorthand expression for circumstantial proof of negligence—a rule of evidence.’ ” Quinby v. Plumsteadville Family Practice, Inc., 589 Pa. 183, 907 A.2d 1061, 1071 (2006) (quoting Gilbert v. Korvette, Inc., 457 Pa. 602, 327 A.2d 94, 99 (1974)). It “allows juries to infer negl......
-
Phillips v. Northwest Regional Communications, Civil Action No. 05-1502.
...for wrongful death requires a determination that a defendant's negligence caused the death." Quinby v. Plumsteadville Family Practice, Inc., 589 Pa. 183, 907 A.2d 1061, 1077 (2006). Under Pennsylvania law, the elements of negligence are (1) the existence of a duty requiring a person to conf......
-
Table of Cases
...§30.300 — Q — Quadlander v. Kansas City Pub. Serv. Co., 224 S.W.2d 396 (1949), §49.200 Quinby v. Plumsteadville Family Practice, Inc. , 907 A.2d 1061 (Pa., 2006), §45.200 Quinlan v. Camden USA, Inc. , 236 P.3d 613 (Nevada, 2010), Overview, §35.400 Quinn v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 774 So.2d 1......
-
Table of Cases
...§30.300 — Q — Quadlander v. Kansas City Pub. Serv. Co., 224 S.W.2d 396 (1949), §49.200 Quinby v. Plumsteadville Family Practice, Inc. , 907 A.2d 1061 (Pa., 2006), §45.200 Quinlan v. Camden USA, Inc. , 236 P.3d 613 (Nevada, 2010), Overview, §35.400 Quinn v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 774 So.2d 1......
-
Table of Cases
...B-50 — Q — Quadlander v. Kansas City Pub. Serv. Co., 224 S.W.2d 396 (1949), §49.200 Quinby v. Plumsteadville Family Practice, Inc. , 907 A.2d 1061 (Pa., 2006), §45.200 Quinlan v. Camden USA, Inc. , 236 P.3d 613 (Nevada, 2010), Overview, §35.400 Quinn v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 774 So.2d 1093......
-
Audio recordings
...action. Also, there was no showing that officers had ever listened to the recording. Quinby v. Plumsteadville Family Practice, Inc ., 907 A.2d 1061 (Pa., 2006). In a negligence action commenced by the wife of a quadriplegic patient, who died following his fall off of an examination table at......