Rucker v. High Point Memorial Hospital, Inc.

• Decision Date: 01 July 1974
• Docket Number: No. 81,81
• Citation: Rucker v. High Point Memorial Hospital, Inc., 285 N.C. 519, 206 S.E.2d 196 (N.C. 1974)
• Parties: Burt E. RUCKER v. HIGH POINT MEMORIAL HOSPITAL, INC., and Horace Henry Stovall, M.D.
• Court: North Carolina Supreme Court

Page 196

206 S.E.2d 196

285 N.C. 519

Burt E. RUCKER v.HIGH POINT MEMORIAL HOSPITAL, INC., and Horace Henry Stovall, M.D.

No. 81.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

July 1, 1974.

Schoch, Schoch, Schoch & Schoch by Arch Schoch, Jr., High Point, and Ellis I. Kahn, Charleston, S.C., for plaintiff-appellee.

Sapp & Sapp by Armistead W. Sapp, Jr., Greensboro, for defendant-appellantHigh Point Memorial Hospital, Inc.

Perry C. Henson and Sammy R. Kirby, Greensboro, for defendant-appellantHorace Henry Stovall, M.D.

W. C. Harris, Jr. and Randolph L. Worth, Raleigh, for North Carolina Hospital Association, amicus curiae.

HIGGINS, Justice.

We agree with the conclusion of the North Carolina Court of Appeals that a new trial should be awarded in this case.However, we are of the opinion that the trial court committed error in excluding from the jury the testimony of Dr. Levy.Dr. Levy admitted that he was not familiar with the facilities of the defendant hospital and was not familiar with the members of its staff or with their qualifications.He testified he was familiar with the standards of practice and procedures in duly accredited hospitals and that they were essentially the same throughout the United States.However, the plaintiff alleged and both defendants admitted that the defendant High Point Memorial Hospital was engaged, at all times herein mentioned, in operating and maintaining 'a fully accredited hospital' in the City of High Point.(Emphasis added.)

Dr. Levy testified that he is familiar with fully accredited hospitals and the standards and practices of such hospitals are essentially the same throughout the United States in the treatment of gunshot wounds; that the treatment of such wounds is standard; that x-ray examination is required to determine the extent of the injury and to determine what, if any, operative procedures should be followed.

The testimony that the treatment is essentially the same is by no means surprising.All shotguns are smooth bore.They perform uniformly as to range and penetration.The ammunition provided for shotguns is practically uniform throughout the United States.To his knowledge acquired through service, seminars, personal consultations, journals and periodicals, gunshot wounds and their treatment are not essentially different in any section of the United States.Insofar as applicable to a local doctor, the rules are stated in Dickens v. Everhart, 284 N.C. 95, 199 S.E.2d 440;Wiggins v. Piver, 276 N.C. 134, 171 S.E.2d 393;Brune v. Belinkoff, 354 Mass. 102, 235 N.E.2d 793;Naccarato v. Grob, 384 Mich. 248, 180 N.W.2d 788;Murphy v. Little, 112 Ga.App. 517, 145 S.E.2d 760;Geraty v. Kaufman, 115 Conn. 563, 162 A. 33;McElroy v. Frost, 268 P.2d 273(Okl.1954);Riley v. Layton, 329 F.2d 53(10th Cir.).

In this case, however, we are not dealing with a local country doctor.We are dealing with a Duly accredited hospital and a member of its staff who was in charge of its emergency department.To begin with, a country doctor (Dr. Armstrong) gave first aid and sent the plaintiff to the defendant Hospital where he knew facilities were available for proper treatment of gunshot wounds.

Clearly the plaintiff's injury required facilities more advanced than were available in a country doctor's office.Dr. Armstrong knew this and sent the plaintiff to the hospital where proper facilities were available.Sound reason supports the view that gunshot wounds of the lower leg lend themselves most readily to uniform medical and surgical treatment without regard to locality.Not all injuries are so uniform and the treatment so generally well known and followed.The medical profession in Alaska, for example, would be informed and knowledgeable on the treatment of snow blindness, frozen feet, and frostbitten lungs, but they would be without experience in the treatment of rattlesnake bites.A Florida doctor would know about the snake bites, but not about frozen feet.A gunshot wound would require the same treatment whether in Florida or Alaska.

Dr. Armstrong made the first examination, performed the functions of giving first aid and of sending the plaintiff to the hospital.There Dr. Stovall took over instead of calling a specialist who by x-ray could examine and determine the extent of the plaintiff's injury and determine what should be done in the treatment.Instead, Dr. Stovall looked at the wound, instructed the nurse to give a shot, and sent the plaintiff back to a country doctor.Dr. Stovall's duty as a staff doctor in the ...