Day on Torts

A friend who is getting ready to file a medical negligence case told me that his medical consultant said this about the case: “It took a whole group of doctors to kill this woman.”

The consultant was not suggesting that the doctors conspired to hurt, much less “kill”, the patient. His point was that in a hospital setting the cause of an injury or death is often not the fault of one person. In the ordinary course, one person makes an error and someone else catchs it before harm is done. No, where things really get messed up is when a group of people is having a bad time of it, where balls are flying all over the place and nobody has a catcher’s mitt or is even aware that the balls are flying around. Simply put, awareness is off, communication breaks down and people get hurt.

The adoption of proper systems can usually prevent these situations from occurring. Indeed, this is one of the reasons behind Vanderbilt’s Evidence-Based Medicine Program that I talked about recently.

The Tennessee Supreme Court has just granted a Rule 9 application in a medical negligence case, even though the Tennessee Court of Appeals refused to do so.

The plaintiff had an abdominal operation several years ago and learned more than three years later that a clip was left on one of her ureters, resulting in the death of one kidney. She brought suit and the defendants asserted the three-year statute of repose. The plaintiff raised the foreign objection exception to the statute of repose. The defendants then asserted because the clip was of the type that is often left in the body it was not a “foreign object” within the meaning of the statute and therefore the suit was untimely.

Plaintiff asserts that even though the clip is of the type often left in the body it is not supposed to be left on a ureter. Essentially, the plaintiff argues that an object can become a “foreign object” if it was left in the body for an unintended use.