Opinion
No. 43493.
April 19, 1965.
1. Hospitals — negligence — verdict for hospital not against great weight of the evidence.
Verdict for hospital sued for damages for broken collar bone allegedly sustained by patient because of negligence of hospital nurse was not against the great weight of the evidence in view of conflict in evidence as to whether patient fell while nurse attended her on bedpan or whether she went to bathroom despite nurse's insistence that she should use bedpan and fell while nurse was engaged in attending to another patient.
Headnote as approved by Lee, C.J.
APPEAL from the Circuit Court of Forrest County; STANTON A. HALL, J.
Carl E. Berry, Jr., Hattiesburg; W.S. Murphy, Lucedale, for appellant.
I. Cited and discussed the following authorities: Graham v. Brummett, 182 Miss. 580, 181 So. 721; Gurley v. Tucker, 170 Miss. 565, 155 So. 189; Hines v. McCullers, 121 Miss. 666, 83 So. 734; Jessup v. Reynolds, 208 Miss. 50, 43 So.2d 753; Lanham v. Wright, 164 Miss. 1, 142 So. 5; McDonough Motor Express v. Spiers, 180 Miss. 78, 176 So. 723, 177 So. 655; Meridian City Lines v. Baker, 206 Miss. 58, 39 So.2d 541; New Biloxi Hospital v. Frazier, 245 Miss. 185, 146 So.2d 882; New Orleans N.E.R. Co. v. Miles, 197 Miss. 846, 20 So.2d 657; Rawlings v. Royals, 214 Miss. 335, 58 So.2d 820; Rowlands v. Morphis, 158 Miss. 662, 130 So. 906; Southern R. Co. v. Ganong, 99 Miss. 540, 55 So. 355; Southland Broadcasting Co. v. Tracy, 210 Miss. 836, 50 So.2d 572; Teche Lines v. Keller, 174 Miss. 527, 165 So. 303; Tynes v. McLendon, 235 Miss. 336, 108 So.2d 716; Yazoo M.V.R. Co. v. Aultman, 179 Miss. 109, 173 So. 280; Yazoo M.V.R. Co. v. Cornelius, 131 Miss. 37, 95 So. 90; Young v. Power, 41 Miss. 197.
M.M. Roberts, Hattiesburg, for appellee.
I. Cited and discussed the following authorities: City of Jackson v. Reed, 233 Miss. 280, 102 So.2d 342; Continental Southern Lines v. Williams, 226 Miss. 624, 85 So.2d 179; Ferguson v. Denton, 239 Miss. 591, 124 So.2d 279; Green v. Gulf, M. O.R. Co., 244 Miss. 211, 141 So.2d 216; Gurley v. Tucker, 170 Miss. 565, 155 So. 189; Harrington v. Pilkinton, 220 Miss. 784, 71 So.2d 884; New Biloxi Hospital v. Frazier, 245 Miss. 185, 146 So.2d 882; New Orleans N.E.R. Co. v. Burney, 248 Miss. 290, 159 So.2d 85; Powell v. J.J. Newman Lumber Co., 174 Miss. 685, 165 So. 299; Rawlings v. Royals, 214 Miss. 335, 58 So.2d 820; Southern R. Co. v. Ganong, 99 Miss. 540, 55 So. 355; Southland Broadcasting Co. v. Tracy, 210 Miss. 836, 50 So.2d 572.
The pleadings and evidence in this case raised an issue as to whether the appellee hospital, through one of its nurses, was guilty of negligence proximately causing or contributing to a broken collarbone which Mrs. Berta Pittman, the appellant, sustained while a patient in the hospital.
Mrs. Pittman testified that, while she was in a weekened condition, Mrs. Louise Simmons, the nurse, was attending her on a bedpan and negligently permitted her to fall. She also stated that the nurse then upbraided her for falling. There was no corroboration of that version, although an aged patient, in the same room, separated by curtains, testified that she heard some harsh language, but was unable to identify the speaker.
On the contrary, Mrs. Simmons, a registered nurse in charge of the floor, testified in detail that she exercised exceptional care and interest toward this patient. She also pointed out wherein such care consisted. Besides, she said that Mrs. Pittman did not fall at the time when she claimed to have done so. Her testimony was to the effect, that sometime before this alleged fall, the patient, in spite of insistence that she should use the bedpan and not go to the bathroom, ignored such advice; and, while Mrs. Simmons was engaged in attending to another patient, Mrs. Pittman went to the bathroom. When a big racket was heard in the bathroom, Mrs. Simmons hurried to the place and found the patient coming out, white as a sheet. However, when she inquired if Mrs. Pittman had fallen, she denied that she had done so.
Since the evidence was in sharp dispute, this presented a question of fact for decision by the jury.
(Hn 1) Manifestly the appellant's requested peremptory instruction to find a verdict for her was properly refused; and the verdict for the appellee hospital was not against the great weight of the evidence.
Thorough consideration has been given to all of the instructions, and the Court is of the opinion that they contained a sufficient announcement of the applicable principles of law in the case.
The Court finds no reversible error in the record, and the cause must therefore be affirmed.
Affirmed.
Ethridge, Gillespie, Brady, and Inzer, JJ., concur.