Schmidt v. Univ. of Cincinnati Med. Ctr.
Decision Date | 16 January 1997 |
Docket Number | No. 96API05-647,96API05-647 |
Parties | SCHMIDT, Exr., Appellant, v. UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI MEDICAL CENTER, Appellee. Tenth District, Franklin County |
Court | Ohio Court of Appeals |
Karen Foeller Marler, Cincinnati, for appellant.
Betty D. Montgomery, Attorney General, and Marilena R. Walters, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.
Plaintiff, Alfred Schmidt, executor of the estate of Barbara Schmidt, deceased, appeals from a judgment of the Court of Claims of Ohio in favor of defendant, University of Cincinnati Medical Center. Plaintiff sets forth the following assignments of error:
1. "The court erred to plaintiffs' detriment in granting defendant's Civil Rule 41(B)(1) motion to dismiss against the manifest weight of the evidence.
2. "The court erred to plaintiffs' detriment in granting defendant's Civil Rule 41(B)(1) motion to dismiss contrary to law."
In 1992, decedent Barbara Schmidt was admitted to Bethesda North Hospital complaining of chest pains. While at the hospital, Mrs. Schmidt experienced a heart attack. Although Mrs. Schmidt survived the heart attack, it was determined that she was in need of an automatic implantable cardioverter defibrillator ("AICD").
Thereafter, Mrs. Schmidt was admitted to the University of Cincinnati Medical Center, defendant herein. Dr. Thomas Ivey, an employee of the hospital, was scheduled to perform the surgical procedure necessary to implant the AICD. In order to implant the AICD, a small incision is made in the patient's abdominal wall, and a clamp is then used to open the abdominal cavity. This allows the surgeon to grasp a chest tube that contains wire leads. The wire leads are then tunneled through the abdominal wall to the pericardium. Tunneling is a blind procedure, meaning that the surgeon cannot actually see where the clamp is placed. In this case, the clamp had penetrated the peritoneum and perforated the stomach, allowing the leads to pass through the stomach. As a consequence of the perforation of the stomach, Mrs. Schmidt developed a postoperative infection. A second surgical procedure was performed by another physician to determine the source of the infection and course of treatment. It was during the second procedure that the perforation of the stomach was discovered. Mrs. Schmidt was subsequently treated for the infection and recovered.
In November 1994, Mrs. Schmidt brought the instant action against defendant, alleging medical malpractice. However, on December 8, 1995, Mrs. Schmidt passed away and her husband, Alfred Schmidt was substituted as party-plaintiff in this action. The case proceeded to a nonjury trial. Following the presentation of plaintiff's case, defendant moved for dismissal of plaintiff's cause pursuant to Civ.R. 41(B)(2). On April 16, 1996, the Court of Claims issued a decision dismissing plaintiff's case. A judgment entry of dismissal was issued by the court on that same day.
In each of plaintiff's assignments of error, plaintiff contends, for slightly different reasons, that the trial court erred when it dismissed plaintiff's medical malpractice claim pursuant to Civ.R. 41. Accordingly, we will address the assignments of error jointly.
Civ.R. 41(B)(2) provides:
In Johnson v. Tansky Sawmill Toyota, Inc. (1994), 95 Ohio App.3d 164, 167, 642 N.E.2d 9, 10-11, we discussed the standard of review of a dismissal, pursuant to Civ.R. 41(B)(2):
In order to establish medical malpractice, plaintiff must demonstrate by the preponderance of the evidence that the injury complained of was caused by a practice that a physician of ordinary skill, care or diligence, would not have employed, and that plaintiff's injury was the direct and proximate result of that practice. Bruni v. Tatsumi (1976), 46 Ohio St.2d 127, 75 O.O.2d 184, 346 N.E.2d 673, at paragraph one of the syllabus. Accordingly, proof of medical malpractice requires evidence of the pertinent recognized standard of the medical community and evidence that the physician negligently departed from that standard. Id. at 131, 75 O.O.2d at 186-187, 346 N.E.2d at 677.
In Turner v. Children's Hosp., Inc. (1991), 76 Ohio App.3d 541, 548, 602 N.E.2d 423, 427, this court discussed the type of evidence necessary to sustain plaintiff's burden of proof in a medical malpractice case:
(Citation omitted.)
In this case, the trial court, as the trier of fact, determined that plaintiff presented insufficient evidence that Dr. Ivey had negligently departed from the applicable standard of care. The court expressly found that the testimony of plaintiff's own expert witness defeated plaintiff's medical malpractice claim. We agree.
Plaintiff presented the testimony of Dr. Loren Hiratzka, a board-certified thoracic surgeon. Hiratzka testified that he had performed between two hundred and...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Gerald A. Deer v. River Valley Health Systems
... ... Clark v. Southview Hosp ... & Family Health Ctr. (1994), 68 Ohio St.3d 435. Under ... the Clark exception, ... See, e.g., ... Cox v. Ohio State Univ. Hospitals (1996), 117 Ohio ... App.3d 254 ... See Jennings Buick, Inc. v ... Cincinnati (1980), 63 Ohio St.2d 167. Res ipsa loquitur ... is not ... See ... Morgan, supra; Schmidt v. Univ. of ... Cincinnati Med. Ctr. (1997), 117 Ohio ... ...
-
William J. Schirmer v. David M. Schneider, M.D.
... ... Mullenix, 1080 Nimitzview Dr., Suite 303, Cincinnati, Ohio ... 45230, for plaintiff-appellant ... at 130. See, also, Schmidt v. Univ. of Cincinnati Med ... Ctr. (1997), 117 Ohio ... ...
-
Kruzer v. City of Cleveland
...that allows, but does not require, the trier of fact to draw an inference of negligence." Schmidt v. Univ. of Cincinnati Med. Ctr., 117 Ohio App.3d 427, 431, 690 N.E.2d 946 (10th Dist. 1997). {¶13} Crucial to the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur is that the plaintiff must establish that the in......
-
David P. Hunter v. the Childern's Medical Center
... ... v ... Cincinnati (1980), 63 Ohio St.2d 167, 169-170. Invoking ... the ... otherwise. See Schmidt v. Univ. of Cincinnati Med ... Ctr., (1997), 117 ... ...