Register v. Wilmington Medical Center, Inc.

Decision Date18 August 1977
Citation377 A.2d 8
PartiesMinnie REGISTER, mother, next friend and guardian ad litem of Kerwin Register, an infant, Plaintiff, Appellant and Cross-Appellee, v. The WILMINGTON MEDICAL CENTER, INC., Defendant, Appellee and Cross-Appellant.
CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Delaware

Upon appeal from Superior Court. Reversed.

Ben T. Castle, of Young, Conaway, Stargatt & Taylor, Wilmington, for plaintiff, appellant and cross-appellee.

Jane R. Roth, of Richards, Layton & Finger, Wilmington, for defendant, appellee and cross-appellant.

Before HERRMANN, C. J., and DUFFY and McNEILLY, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

In this medical malpractice action, plaintiff appeals from a judgment entered on the verdict of a Superior Court jury for The Wilmington Medical Center, Inc. (defendant). * We conclude that the Trial Court improperly withheld from the jury relevant evidence concerning the attending physician's past professional performance and, for that reason, we reverse.

I

Plaintiff brings this action for damages on behalf of her minor child who was injured during childbirth. The resulting condition, known medically as "Erb's palsy," has left the child with permanent partial paralysis of the right arm.

Principally, plaintiff contends that: (1) defendant's employees negligently injured the child during the course of delivery, and (2) defendant failed to properly supervise the conduct of its employees in the performance of their duties. Agency is not disputed and the Center will be liable under the doctrine of respondeat superior if plaintiff can establish the physician's malpractice. Vanaman v. Milford Memorial Hospital, Inc., Del.Supr., 272 A.2d 718, 720 (1970); see generally, Annot., 69 A.L.R.2d 305 (1960).

The physician in control of the delivery was a first-year obstetrics resident enrolled in a residency program. At trial, plaintiff sought to introduce into evidence performance evaluation reports of the resident which were routinely prepared by doctors on the Center's staff. Testimony of one of the evaluators was also offered into evidence.

Defendant objected on relevancy grounds to both the reports and the testimony and, after argument on the issue, the Trial Court ruled that the evidence could not be presented to the jury.

II

It is settled law in Delaware that a physician is bound to exercise the same degree of care and to perform with the same competence ordinarily exercised and performed by other physicians in good standing in the same community. Coleman v. Garrison, Del.Supr., 349 A.2d 8, 10 n. 2 (1975), and cases cited therein. Similarly, a hospital, as an employer of health care personnel, is required to make available to persons receiving such care, employees who possess the skill and training necessary to comply with the Coleman standard. See, generally, Annot., 51 A.L.R.3d 981 (1973).

The Center, of course, functions in many capacities, two of which are identified in this lawsuit: it offers advanced medical education (through a residency program in obstetrics) and it provides medical assistance to expectant mothers (in a child-delivery facility). The Center's educational activity, however, does not in any way weaken or modify the duty placed upon it by law as an entity providing medical assistance. In short, a physician practicing as a resident is bound by Coleman. Cf. Moeller v. Hauser, 237 Minn. 368, 54 N.W.2d 639 (1952). And when the Center furnishes health care, it is required to provide a doctor who measures up to that standard.

Evidence as to the Center's responsibility for a resident's conduct may be admitted on at least two theories: it may be received under generally accepted agency principles, Vanaman v. Milford Memorial Hospital, Inc., supra, or it may be received on the issue of whether the Center negligently utilized or failed to adequately supervise a resident who did not meet the Coleman standard in performing the task to which he was assigned. See, generally, Prosser, The Law of Torts § 70 (4 ed.), 51 A.L.R.3d, supra, and the Restatement (Second) of Torts §§ 307, 308 (1965) and the Restatement (Second) of Agency § 213 (1958); the latter provides in pertinent part:

"A person conducting an activity through servants or other agents is subject to liability for harm resulting from his conduct if he is negligent or reckless:

(b) in the employment of improper persons or instrumentalities in work involving risk of harm to others:

(c) in the supervision of the activity; or . . .."

That principle supports the instruction given by the Trial Judge to the jury as follows:

"Now, the defendant, Wilmington Medical Center, Incorporated, is in the business of providing health services to the general public and holds itself out as being qualified to provide such services. When an institution, such as a hospital, holds itself liable as being qualified to provide health services to the public, it is the general rule that it is bound to the same standard of care and competence as other employers of health services in good standing ordinarily adhered to in the same or similar community. This standard requires that the hospital make available employees that possess a reasonable average ability to...

To continue reading

Request your trial
13 cases
  • DeMarco v. Christiana Care Health Servs., Inc.
    • United States
    • Court of Chancery of Delaware
    • September 24, 2021
    ...18 Del. C. § 6801(7) ; see also 16 Del. C. § 2508 (describing the statutory obligations of health care providers); Reg. v. Wilm. Med. Ctr., Inc. , 377 A.2d 8, 9–10 (Del. 1977) ("It is settled law in Delaware that a physician is bound to exercise the same degree of care and to perform with t......
  • Fjerstad v. Knutson
    • United States
    • South Dakota Supreme Court
    • October 26, 1978
    ...do so non-negligently. See Citizens Hospital Association v. Schoulin, 48 Ala.App. 101, 262 So.2d 303 (1972); Register v. Wilmington Medical Center Inc., 377 A.2d 8 (Del.Supr.1977); Bourgeois v. Dade County, 99 So.2d 575 (Fla.1957); Grewe v. Mount Clemens General Hospital, 74 Mich.App. 479, ......
  • DeMarco v. Christiana Care Health Servs.
    • United States
    • Court of Chancery of Delaware
    • September 24, 2021
    ... ... CHRISTIANA CARE HEALTH SERVICES, INC., Defendant. C. A. No. 2021-0804-MTZ Court of Chancery of ... FARKAS + KITTILA LLP, Wilmington, Delaware; Ralph C. Lorigo, ... LAW OFFICE OF RALPH ... of ivermectin were through discharge against medical advice, ... and through a court order. After trying ... completed a fellowship at Tufts Medical Center in pulmonary ... and critical care medicine. Id ... ...
  • Grimes v. DSC Communications Corp.
    • United States
    • Court of Chancery of Delaware
    • August 5, 1998
    ...analyzed a claim asserting the self-critical analysis privilege. The first case analyzing the privilege was Register v. Wilmington Medical Center, Inc., Del.Supr., 377 A.2d 8 (1977). In Register, a medical malpractice case, the Delaware Supreme Court held that the trial court had committed ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles

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