Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.

Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw

Stewart v. Richland

Date: 06-03-2002

Case Number: 3509

Judge: Stilwell

Court: In The Court of Appeals of South Carolina

Plaintiff's Attorney: "_new">Arthur K. Aiken, of Hammer, Hammer, Carrigg & Potterfield; and "_new">Charles L. Henshaw, Jr., of Furr & Henshaw, both of Columbia, for appellant.

Defendant's Attorney: "_new">Charles E. Carpenter and "_new">S. Elizabeth Brosnan, of Richardson, Plowden, Carpenter & Robinson, of Columbia, for respondent.

Description:

James Stewart brought this negligence action against Richland Memorial Hospital (RMH) alleging the nurse on duty breached the professional standard of care by removing his restraints and failing to monitor him, thereby providing substandard care. Stewart appeals the jury verdict for RMH, asserting the trial court erred in ruling that Stewart had to prove gross negligence in order to prevail and therefore improperly charged the jury. We affirm.

Facts

While Stewart was in the hospital recovering from surgery, a respiratory therapist went to his room to administer a breathing treatment at approximately 12:15 a.m. Stewart was uncooperative and wanted to get out of bed. As a result of his combative and agitated behavior, the nurse who was assigned to care for Stewart that night placed him in four point restraints. At 12:30 a.m., the nurse contacted Stewart's doctor, who ordered medication changes and instructed her to continue the restraints. At 1:45 a.m., the nurse noted Stewart was resting quietly and she continued to monitor him. At 2:45 a.m., she noted Stewart was alert and responsive and released him from the restraints. At some point between 6:00 a.m. and 7:00 a.m., Stewart fell from his bed and was discovered on the floor of his room around 7:00 a.m.

Later that day, Stewart's doctor ordered an x-ray of his knee and hip, which did not indicate any fractures or dislocation. Over a month later, Stewart was diagnosed with a left hip fracture. His expert testified that his hip fracture was likely caused by his fall at RMH. The trial judge ruled that section 15-78-60(25) provided RMH with immunity unless gross negligence was proven, and accordingly charged the jury that Stewart had to prove RMH was grossly negligent in breaching the professional nursing standard of care.

* * *

Click the case caption above for the
full text of the Court's opinion.

Outcome:

The judge correctly and substantially charged the professional nursing standard of care as well as charging plaintiff's burden to prove gross negligence by defendant under the South Carolina Tort Claims Act in breach of that standard. The trial court's instructions to the jury adequately conveyed to the jury RMH's duty to protect Stewart.

Affirmed for the Defendant.

Plaintiff's Experts:

Unavailable

Defendant's Experts:

Unavailable

Comments:

C.L.

About This Case

What was the outcome of Stewart v. Richland?

The outcome was: The judge correctly and substantially charged the professional nursing standard of care as well as charging plaintiff's burden to prove gross negligence by defendant under the South Carolina Tort Claims Act in breach of that standard. The trial court's instructions to the jury adequately conveyed to the jury RMH's duty to protect Stewart. Affirmed for the Defendant.

Which court heard Stewart v. Richland?

This case was heard in In The Court of Appeals of South Carolina, SC. The presiding judge was Stilwell.

Who were the attorneys in Stewart v. Richland?

Plaintiff's attorney: Arthur K. Aiken, of Hammer, Hammer, Carrigg & Potterfield; and Charles L. Henshaw, Jr., of Furr & Henshaw, both of Columbia, for appellant.. Defendant's attorney: Charles E. Carpenter and S. Elizabeth Brosnan, of Richardson, Plowden, Carpenter & Robinson, of Columbia, for respondent..

When was Stewart v. Richland decided?

This case was decided on June 3, 2002.