Did use of wrong aorta graft result in paraplegia?(Hospital Law Case of the Month)(Case overview)

CASE ON POINT: Watts v. Jennie Edmundson Hosp., 2009-01310.001(1/30/2009)-IA

CASE FACTS: Scott Watts was injured in a motor vehicle accident on May 25, 1993. He was taken to the ER at Jennie Edmundson Hospital. Later, physicians determined he needed surgery to repair an injury to his aorta. During surgery, the aorta ruptured, rendering Scott a paraplegic. He and his family filed suit on May 2, 1998. The original petition named eight defendants, including the hospital, treating physicians, and the separate employers of some of the treating physicians. Trial was set for March 20. The Wattses designated twenty-six witnesses, including four expert standard-of-care witnesses. The hospital designated Barbara Braafhart, R.N., and cross-designated the experts of the other defendants. The Wattses dismissed two defendants without prejudice on January 28, 2000. Except for the hospital, the other defendants reach a $1.5 million settlement with the Wattses sometime in mid-March 2000. On March 2000, counsel for both parties stipulated the hospital would pay the Wattses $200,000 and the parties would engage in further mediation. The District Court's ruling on the stipulation stated that if the case was to be tried, there would be no new issues and no new witnesses. Mediation was unsucessful. On May 16, 2003, the hospital filed a motion for summary judgment. The hospital argued, it had no vicarious liability for any alleged negligence of the physician defendants and no liability for negligent credentialing or granting of privileges to any of the physician defendants. In June 2003, the hospital filed three motions in limine and a motion to strike new allegations of negligence. The motion requested the court to (1) prohibit the Wattses from introducing evidence concerning medical expenses not personally paid by them; (2) prevent a treating nurse, Rocco Cardilo, from testifying as an expert witness; (3) prohibit an expert witness from testifying; and (4) strike new allegations of negligence made in supplemental interrogatories and expert witness depositions. On July 1, 2003, the District Court dismissed the two claims identified by the hospital in its motion for summary judgment. On July 1, 2003, the Wattses filed a motion to reconsider, arguing that the "Court failed to consider that Plaintiffs have independent actions of negligence against the nursing staff of Defendant hospital." The District Court at: firmed the grant of summary judgment of claims relating to the hospital's vicarious liability for the negligence of the doctors, for allowing Dr. Denis-Flowes to practice medicine in its ER, and plaintiffs' earlier settlement with the doctors' insurance company.

COURT'S OPINION: The Court of Appeals of Iowa Affirmed the judgment of the lower court in part, reversed it in part, and Remanded the case for a new trial. The court affirmed the lower court with regard to a rulings concerning the April 25, 205, amended petition. The court ...