Eyoma v. Falco

589 A.2d 653 (App.Div. 1991)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

Coker (decedent) was admitted to the hospital for the removal of his gallbladder. The actual operation was 'a relatively short, simple procedure,' and Coker was transported to the recovery room. Decedent was initially breathing at a rate of twelve respirations per minute, and his blood pressure was stable. The attendant nurse was orally instructed to watch his respirations. One nurse observed his respirations to be eight per minute during her shift. When the doctor returned, he realized that Coker was not breathing. They immediately attempted to resuscitate but Coker's heart rate began to drop, and he went into cardiac arrest. Twenty minutes elapsed before Coker resumed breathing. He became oxygen deprived, entered a comatose state and remained unconscious for over a year until his death on January 20, 1987. The respiratory arrest was due to respiratory depression resulting from the influence of anesthesia and a narcotic drug. P sued Ds for wrongful death. The doctor was aware of reports that Sufentanil can cause a patient to appear conscious and then later undergo a delayed reaction which terminates breathing. Ps' medical expert testified that the doctor deviated from the proper standard of care because he 'should have stayed in the recovery room and checked on the patient for about at least ten minutes and then should have stayed longer if he wasn't satisfied the patient was doing well.' The expert cited the failure to communicate to the nurse the specific drug given to the decedent, and the doctor's failure to take adequate measures to verify that he had sufficiently reversed the effects of a muscle relaxant given earlier, as departures from proper practice. D's experts asserted that it was the job of the recovery room nurse to monitor the patient and that the doctor had not deviated from medical standards in leaving the recovery room under the circumstances, nor had he deviated from any other requisite standards. Both experts concluded that the cause of the respiratory arrest was improper monitoring by the recovery room nurse. Coker lived a normal, uneventful life, but his expenses appeared to have exceeded his reported income. The jury was instructed on loss of enjoyment of life for while Coker was in a coma for a year. The jury found Nurse Falco 100% liable, thereby exonerating Dr. Brotherton. The jury awarded the estate $140,853.98 on the survival action including the stipulated $121,065.98 for medical expenses and $2,288 for funeral expenses. The jury thus awarded $17,500 for loss of enjoyment of life from January 9, 1986 to January 20, 1987. On the wrongful death action, the jury awarded $25,000 to each of Coker's two daughters. No damages were awarded to his mother. P moved for a new trial or an additur. The trial judge granted Ps' motion for additur, granting an additional $132,500 for loss of enjoyment of life. Falco (D) appealed seeking to vacate the entire award for loss of enjoyment of life, or, alternatively, seeking to reinstate the original jury verdict. Ps cross-appealed fora new trial or alternatively for damages.