1 RENDERED: AUGUST 10, 2007; 10:00 A.M. TO BE PUBLISHED Commonwealth of Kentucky Court of Appeals NO CA MR MADONNA GREEN APPELLANT v. APPEAL FROM DAVIESS CIRCUIT COURT HONORABLE THOMAS O. CASTLEN, JUDGE ACTION NO. 03-CI OWENSBORO MEDICAL HEALTH SYSTEM, INC.; ORTHOPAEDICS & SPORTS MEDICINE OWENSBORO, P.S.C.; AND LOWELL WESTERFIELD, M.D. APPELLEES OPINION AFFIRMING ** ** ** ** ** BEFORE: ABRAMSON AND NICKELL, JUDGES; PAISLEY, 1 SENIOR JUDGE. NICKELL, JUDGE: Madonna Green (hereinafter Green ) brings this appeal from a June 16, 2005, order of the Daviess Circuit Court granting summary judgment to all appellees in this medical malpractice case. We affirm. The relevant facts are that Green fractured her finger. Dr. Charles Milem, an orthopedic surgeon practicing with Orthopaedics and Sports Medicine of Owensboro, 1 Senior Judge Lewis G. Paisley sitting as Special Judge by assignment of the Chief Justice pursuant to Section 110(5)(b) of the Kentucky Constitution and Kentucky Revised Statutes (KRS)
2 P.S.C. (hereinafter OSMO ), performed surgery on Green s hand on October 15, Dr. Lowell Westerfield provided general anesthesia during the procedure. By all accounts the hand surgery was successful, but upon awakening in the recovery room, Green discovered her top four front teeth were loose, misaligned, and bloody. On October 14, 2003, Green filed suit against OSMO, Dr. Westerfield, and Owensboro Medical Health System, Inc. (hereinafter OMHS ), the facility where the surgery occurred. Green alleged negligence by all three appellees in caring for her while she was unconscious. Green sought reimbursement for past and future dental bills as well as damages for her pain and suffering. On October 23, 2003, OMHS filed interrogatories asking for the name of any expert witness Green intended to call at trial. On November 4, 2003, OSMO also filed interrogatories specifically asking whether Green had obtained an expert opinion as to the applicable standard of care. When Green did not respond, the appellees filed motions to compel. Following a hearing on March 16, 2004, the trial court entered an order requiring Green to respond to all discovery requests by April 15, Green filed a flurry of responses on April 15, 2004, but failed to name an expert witness. On August 5, 2004, the trial court directed Green to disclose any expert witnesses by November 15, Green filed a timely response naming Dr. Barry Curry, DMD, Green s regular dentist, as an expert witness. However, Dr. Curry s testimony was to be limited to Green s pre- and post-operative dental condition and his belief that Green s current dental health resulted from trauma and not an ongoing disease
3 Green was deposed on May 26, Her husband, Joseph Green, was deposed on November 29, No other testimony was taken. In December 2004, Dr. Westerfield, OMHS, and OSMO each sought summary judgments based on Green s failure to name an expert on the standard of care applicable to each respective appellee. In its order dated January 18, 2005, the trial court denied the summary judgment motions, giving Green an additional 90 days in which to produce an expert. The 90-day extension expired in April 2005 without further disclosure. On June 16, 2005, the trial court entered summary judgment in favor of all appellees and dismissed the action with prejudice. This appeal followed. On appeal, Green first contends the trial court abused its discretion in requiring her to offer expert standard of care testimony to prove her claim of medical negligence. She contends such expert testimony on the standard of care was unnecessary because jurors, based upon common knowledge and experience alone, could have inferred negligence from the facts. Green also contends the trial court erroneously entered summary judgment in favor of all three appellees. Whether expert testimony is required in a given case is squarely within the trial court s discretion. Keene v. Commonwealth, 516 S.W.2d 852, 855 (Ky. 1974). Absent an abuse of discretion, we will not disturb the trial court s ruling. Baptist Healthcare Systems, Inc. v. Miller, 177 S.W.3d 676, (Ky. 2005). Generally, liability for medical negligence requires expert medical testimony establishing the applicable standard of care and the breach thereof. However, there are - 3 -
4 two circumstances in which negligence may be inferred without expert medical testimony. The first is where the negligence and injurious results are so apparent that laymen with a general knowledge would have no difficulty in recognizing it. Jarboe v. Harting, 397 S.W.2d 775, 778 (Ky. 1965) (citations omitted); Johnson v. Vaughn, 370 S.W.2d 591, 596 (Ky. 1963). See also Perkins v. Hausladen, 828 S.W.2d 652, 655 (Ky. 1992); Baptist Healthcare Systems, Inc., supra, at 680. The second is where other medical testimony provides an adequate foundation for res ipsa loquitur on more complex matters. Perkins, supra at 655 (quoting Prosser and Keeton on Torts, Sec. 39 (5th ed. 1984)). Since no medical testimony was taken, the second exception does not apply to the facts at hand. Thus, we are left to decide whether laymen have sufficient common knowledge about administering anesthesia to infer negligence from the facts alone. While it seems unusual for a patient to enter an operating room for hand surgery with teeth intact and emerge with loose, misaligned, and bloody teeth, we do not believe a layman, without medical expert testimony identifying the required standard of care and the breach thereof, could competently determine an anesthesiologist, surgeon, and/or health care facility did something wrong before, during, and/or after Green s surgery so as to cause damage to her teeth. Such medical negligence would have been even less obvious to the average juror in the present case because Green admitted in her deposition that she suffers from multiple sclerosis and periodontal disease, thereby possibly making her more prone to dental injury
5 Green offered no expert medical testimony from which a trier of fact could conclude any of the defendants breached the applicable standard of care. Contrary to Green s belief, we cannot say the average layperson possesses sufficient medical knowledge about intubation procedures, anesthesiology, and orthopedic surgery to determine Green's loose teeth obviously resulted from negligence. Therefore, we hold the trial court did not abuse its discretion in requiring Green to offer expert medical testimony to establish the respective requisite standard of care pertaining to each appellee. Finally, having affirmed the trial court s decision requiring expert medical testimony, it necessarily follows, contrary to Green s second contention, that we find no error in the granting of summary judgment to each of the appellees. Summary judgment is appropriate when a party is given the opportunity to present evidence showing a disputed material fact exists and the court ultimately finds no such dispute exists. Hoke v. Cullinan, 914 S.W.2d 335, 337 (Ky. 1995). Green had many opportunities, spanning well over one year, to secure expert witnesses to establish the respective standard of care expected of an anesthesiologist, an orthopedic surgeon, and a health care facility. The only expert witness Green named was her own general practice dentist. However, her family dentist was never listed as an authority regarding any applicable standard of care. Thus, even if Green could prove she suffered dental trauma, she failed to produce any evidence to establish that such trauma resulted from negligence by any or all of the defendants. Without an expert medical witness to establish deviation from the applicable standard of care, Green could not prevail on her medical malpractice claim under any - 5 -
6 circumstance. Steelvest, Inc. v. Scansteel Service Center, Inc., 807 S.W.2d 476, 479 (Ky. 1991). In short, having failed to introduce evidence sufficient to establish the respective applicable standards of care, it was a legal impossibility for Green to prove the essential element of any alleged breach thereof. Thus, the trial court properly granted summary judgment in favor of Dr. Westerfield, OSMO, and OMHS. For the foregoing reasons, the order of the Daviess Circuit Court granting summary judgment is affirmed. ALL CONCUR. BRIEF FOR APPELLANT: Bruce E. Kuegel Owensboro, Kentucky BRIEF FOR APPELLEE OWENSBORO MEDICAL HEALTH SYSTEM: Ronald G. Sheffer William K. Burnham Louisville, Kentucky BRIEF FOR APPELLEE ORTHOPAEDIC SPORTS MEDICINE: David F. Broderick P. Kevin Hackworth Bowling Green, Kentucky BRIEF FOR APPELLEE LOWELL WESTERFIELD, M.D.: Frank Stainback Tyson Kamuf Owensboro, Kentucky - 6 -
RENDERED: MARCH 20, 2015; 10:00 A.M. NOT TO BE PUBLISHED Commonwealth of Kentucky Court of Appeals NO. 2013-CA-001633-MR JULIA ANN ASHCRAFT APPELLANT APPEAL FROM JEFFERSON CIRCUIT COURT v. HONORABLE JUDITH
In the Missouri Court of Appeals Western District STEVE AUSTIN, Appellant, v. JOHN SCHIRO, M.D., Respondent. WD78085 OPINION FILED: May 26, 2015 Appeal from the Circuit Court of Clinton County, Missouri
No. 108,461 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF KANSAS DARLENE HUBBARD, Appellant, v. B. THEO MELLION, M.D., Appellee. SYLLABUS BY THE COURT 1. Summary judgment is appropriate when the pleadings, depositions,
Pursuant to Ind.Appellate Rule 65(D), this Memorandum Decision shall not be regarded as precedent or cited before any court except for the purpose of establishing the defense of res judicata, collateral
IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA Carl Whitehead, : Appellant : : No. 1075 C.D. 2014 v. : : Submitted: November 14, 2014 Commonwealth of Pennsylvania : BEFORE: HONORABLE BONNIE BRIGANCE LEADBETTER,
FOR PUBLICATION ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANT: KENNETH J. ALLEN DAVID W. CONOVER WILLIAM LAZARUS Kenneth J. Allen & Associates, P.C. Valparaiso, Indiana ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEES: EDWARD R. MOOR MICHAEL C. BRUCK
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE Assigned on Briefs May 5, 2011 BRANDE KIRK, ET AL. v. MICHAEL A. CHAVIN, M.D. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Hamblen County No. 05CV256 John K. Wilson,
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI NO. 2013-IA-00181-SCT VICKSBURG HEALTHCARE, LLC d/b/a RIVER REGION HEALTH SYSTEM v. CLARA DEES DATE OF JUDGMENT: 01/22/2013 TRIAL JUDGE: HON. ISADORE W. PATRICK, JR.
BRYANT AUSTIN AND SHIRLEY AUSTIN v. IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO. 1998-CA-00905-COA BAPTIST MEMORIAL HOSPITAL - NORTH MISSISSIPPI APPELLANTS APPELLEE CONSOLIDATED WITH NO. 97-CA-00186
RENDERED: MARCH 5, 2010; 10:00 A.M. TO BE PUBLISHED Commonwealth of Kentucky Court of Appeals NO. 2007-CA-002112-MR STEVEN H. KEENEY APPELLANT APPEAL FROM JEFFERSON CIRCUIT COURT v. HONORABLE MARTIN F.
RENDERED: JANUARY 22, 2010; 10:00 A.M. NOT TO BE PUBLISHED Commonwealth of Kentucky Court of Appeals NO. 2009-CA-000566-MR TOM COX APPELLANT APPEAL FROM LAUREL CIRCUIT COURT v. HONORABLE JOHN KNOX MILLS,
FOR PUBLICATION ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT: WILLIAM W. DRUMMY HOLLY A. REEDY Wilkinson, Goeller, Modesitt, Wilkinson & Drummy, LLP Terre Haute, Indiana ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEE: JERRY GARAU Garau Germano Hanley
Filed 7/28/15 Foss v. San Antonio Community Hospital CA4/2 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions
5.51 LEGAL MALPRACTICE (Approved 6/79) CHARGE 5.51A Page 1 of 9 A. General Duty Owing An action brought against an attorney alleging negligence in the practice of law is referred to as a malpractice action.
This opinion will be unpublished and may not be cited except as provided by Minn. Stat. 480A.08, subd. 3 (2012). STATE OF MINNESOTA IN COURT OF APPEALS A14-0499 Laura Tollefson, Appellant, vs. Robert Keck,
RENDERED: MAY 9, 2008; 2:00 P.M. NOT TO BE PUBLISHED Commonwealth of Kentucky Court of Appeals NO. 2007-CA-000960-MR ABBIE BROCK, INDIVIDUALLY; ABBIE BROCK, AS EXECUTRIX OF THE ESTATE OF WILEY BROCK, DECEASED
MEDICAL MALPRACTICE RECENT DEVELOPMENTS: MARCH 2010 MARCH 2011 By Matthew D. Ballew Zaytoun Law Firm, PLLC 3130 Fairhill Drive, Suite 100 Raleigh, NC 27612 Tel: (919) 832-6690 Fax: (919) 831-4793 firstname.lastname@example.org
PUBLISHED OPINION Case No.: 94-3344 Complete Title of Case:RICKI A. RITT, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. DENTAL CARE ASSOCIATES, S.C., GREGORY C. SKELDING, D.D.S., AND ST. PAUL FIRE & MARINE INSURANCE COMPANY,
REPORTED IN THE COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS OF MARYLAND No. 2236 SEPTEMBER TERM, 2000 RICHARD WATTS, ET AL. v. MICHAEL KING Eyler, James R., Kenney, Bloom, Theodore G. (Ret d, specially assigned), JJ. Opinion
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT OF OHIO HAMILTON COUNTY, OHIO DEBORAH FISHER, vs. Plaintiff-Appellant, HARRY VAN LOVEREN, M.D., BRAD OSBORNE, M.D., MAYFIELD NEUROLOGICAL INSTITUTE, and
This opinion will be unpublished and may not be cited except as provided by Minn. Stat. 480A.08, subd. 3 (2012). STATE OF MINNESOTA IN COURT OF APPEALS A13-1209 Molly Murillo, Appellant, vs. Eric Heegaard,
STATE OF IDAHO ) County of KOOTENAI ) ss FILED AT O'Clock M CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT Deputy IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF IDAHO IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF KOOTENAI JUDITH
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON SEPTEMBER 19, 2006 Session BOBBY L. HOLLAND and wife, RITA HOLLAND v. AMELIA JO DINWIDDIE, DDS d/b/a JO DINWIDDIE, DDS Direct Appeal from the Circuit Court
STATE OF MINNESOTA IN SUPREME COURT A10-0478 Court of Appeals Anderson, G. Barry, J. Took no part, Page, J. Elaine M. Wesely, Appellant, vs. Filed: September 7, 2011 Office of Appellate Courts A. David
NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY APPELLATE DIVISION DOCKET NO. A-2495-14T2 MELODY FAITH MAZUR, as ATTORNEY- IN-FACT for DORIS ELIZABETH ARMSTRONG,
Wheeler v. Mid-Vt. ENT, P.C., No. 657-8-08 Rdcv (Cohen, J., Mar. 9, 2009) [The text of this Vermont trial court opinion is unofficial. It has been reformatted from the original. The accuracy of the text
[Cite as Grove v. Northeast Ohio Nephrology Assoc., Inc., 2005-Ohio-6914.] STATE OF OHIO ) IN THE COURT OF APPEALS )ss: NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COUNTY OF SUMMIT ) MARVIN GROVE, et al. Appellees C. A. Nos.