Teh Len Chu v. Fairfax Emergency Medical Associates, Ltd., 791612

Decision Date30 April 1982
Docket NumberNo. 791612,791612
Citation290 S.E.2d 820,223 Va. 383
PartiesTEH LEN CHU, Administrator, etc. v. FAIRFAX EMERGENCY MEDICAL ASSOCIATES, LTD. Record
CourtVirginia Supreme Court

John D. Grad, Alexandria, for appellant.

Norman F. Slenker, Arlington (Slenker, Brandt, Jennings & Johnston, Arlington, on brief), for appellee.

Before CARRICO, C. J., and COCHRAN, POFF, COMPTON, THOMPSON and STEPHENSON, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

On January 10, 1977, Wing C. Chu, a youth of sixteen, died in the emergency room at Fairfax Hospital of an aspirin overdose. His father and administrator, Teh Len Chu, brought this medical malpractice action against Fairfax Hospital Association and Fairfax Emergency Medical Associates, Ltd., for damages allegedly resulting from Wing's death.

In a jury trial, at the request of the defendants, the trial court granted Instruction J, which reads:

The Court instructs the jury that if an Emergency Room physician in making his diagnosis and in rendering treatment brings to his patient that degree of care, skill and knowledge which is possessed by the average member of his profession in the same line of practice, in the Fairfax, Virginia area or similar locality, and under like or similar circumstances, he is not liable for damages resulting from his honest mistake or a bona fide error in judgment. You are instructed that the law requires a physician to base any professional decision that he may make on skillful and careful study and consideration of the case, but when the decision depends upon an exercise of judgment, the law requires only that the judgment be made in good faith, and in accordance with accepted medical standards of practice in the Fairfax, Virginia area or other similar type locality.

The jury returned a verdict in these words:

We, the Jury, on the issue joined in the case of Teh Len Chu, Administrator of the Estate of Wing C. Chu, Deceased, Plaintiff, versus Fairfax Hospital Association and Fairfax [Emergency] Medical [Associates], Ltd., Defendants, find in favor of the Defendant(s): Not Guilty since the law requires only that the judgement be made in good faith etc. as per instruction J.

(The italics indicate language added by the jury to a verdict form supplied by the trial court).

Judgment was entered on the verdict, and this appeal followed. 1 The sole question concerns the action of the trial court in granting Instruction J. Believing this action was error, we reverse.

In Fox v. Mason, 139 Va. 667, 670, 124 S.E. 405, 406 (1924), we said that a physician attending a patient must use the same degree of skill and knowledge that is ordinarily exercised in like cases by physicians practicing in similar localities and " 'must exercise his best judgment in the application of his skill and in the use of ordinary care.' " 2

The applicable standard, therefore, is completely unitary in nature,...

To continue reading

Request your trial
28 cases
  • Foster v. Klaumann
    • United States
    • Kansas Court of Appeals
    • September 11, 2009
    ...v. Behrens, 380 N.W.2d 659, 663 (S.D.1986); Wall v. Stout, 310 N.C. 184, 311 S.E.2d 571, 577 (1984); Teh Len Chu v. Fairfax Emergency Med. Assocs., 223 Va. 383, 290 S.E.2d 820, 822 (1982))." In numerous cases from other jurisdictions, courts have determined that a best judgment jury instruc......
  • Fergen v. Sestero
    • United States
    • Washington Supreme Court
    • March 12, 2015
    ...” or “ ‘ “bad faith error.” ’ ” Watson v. Hockett, 107 Wash.2d 158, 165, 727 P.2d 669 (1986) (quoting Teh Len Chu v. Fairfax Emergency Med. Assocs., 223 Va. 383, 386, 290 S.E.2d 820 (1982) ). Absent the offending language, we noted, such an instruction could be given in a proper case, but i......
  • Pleasants v. Alliance Corp.
    • United States
    • West Virginia Supreme Court
    • December 12, 2000
    ...of judgment" instruction since statutorily-defined standard of care is stated in objective terms); Teh Len Chu v. Fairfax Emergency Medical Assocs., 223 Va. 383, 290 S.E.2d 820, 822 (1982) (holding that terms such as "bona fide error" or "honest mistake" have no place in instructions dealin......
  • Morlino v. Medical Center of Ocean county
    • United States
    • New Jersey Supreme Court
    • February 26, 1998
    ...limited;" and (2) "mere error in judgment" language because it is "ambiguous and subjective"); Teh Len Chu v. Fairfax Emergency Medical Assocs., Ltd., 223 Va. 383, 290 S.E.2d 820, 822 (1982) (stating that terms such as "honest mistake" and "bona fide error in judgment" have no place in jury......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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