Doctrine of Respondeat Superior Medical Law.ISSUE: Ordinarily, patients suing physicians and/or hospitals for medical malpractice must have physicians as medical experts to testify on their behalf.
Doctrine of Respondeat Superior €“ Medical Law

CASE ON POINT: Sacks v. Necaise, 2007 MSCA 2006-CA-01068 (12/11/07) So.2d€“MS
ISSUE: Ordinarily, patients suing physicians and/or hospitals for medical malpractice must have physicians as medical experts to testify on their behalf. In this case the alleged malpractice involved the doctrine of Respondent Superior. Simply put, should physicians and their practice groups be liable for the failure of registered nurses employed by them and their practice groups be liable for the continued infusion of potent drugs into patients’ arms, which have become swollen from two to three times normal size, turned color, and have been the source of pain to patients?
CASE FACTS: Charles Freeman was diagnosed with lung cancer in early 1998. Freeman, also suffered from diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, atherosclerotic vascular disease, and mild organic brain syndrome. He began chemotherapy treatment by intravenous therapy on January 22, 1998, at the Medical Oncology Group, P.A. (MOG), under the supervision of Dr. Matthew Sacks. Freeman’s cancer was treated with Taxol, which is highly toxic and, at the time, commonly used in treating cancer patients. Freeman’s first treatment was relatively uneventful. On February 12, 1998, MOG’s staff administered a second treatment. During this treatment, Freeman experienced pain, swelling, and discoloration of the arm that was being infused. In spite of the condition of Freeman’s arm at the infusion site, Nurse Byrd continued to infuse Taxol through the same site. Over the next several days, the skin on Freeman’s arm began to peel off, and the area became swollen to two or three times its normal size, and characterized as a third degree chemical burn. On August 19, 1998, Freeman filed suit against Dr. Sacks and MOG. He alleged that MOG’s staff and Dr. Sacks, were negligent and vicariously liable for the continued administration of Taxol by Nurse Byrd, while standard nursing practice dictated that the infusion should have been discontinued. Freeman died in January 1999, from unrelated causes. His daughter, Nancy Necaise, was substituted as plaintiff. The key issue in the case was whether Pamela Jenner, a registered nurse with experience in administering chemotherapy, should have been allowed to testify as an expert witness for the plaintiff. Nurse Jenner testified that Nurse Byrd failed to comply with the applicable standard of care. The trial court allowed Nurse Jenner’s testimony to be admitted into evidence. After a bench trial, the trial court found Dr. Sacks and MOG liable and awarded the plaintiff $217,343.00. Dr. Sack

. .

The post Doctrine of Respondeat Superior Medical Law.ISSUE: Ordinarily, patients suing physicians and/or hospitals for medical malpractice must have physicians as medical experts to testify on their behalf. appeared first on cheap nursing papers.