Laney v. Vance

112 So.3d 1079 (2013)

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

Mamie began treatment for confusion, decreased appetite, and tremors, and also had end-stage renal disease, respiratory failure, pneumonia, and had been on dialysis. She was treated, but her blood pressure dropped unexpectedly, and she began to have abdominal pain. The doctors attempted dialysis, but the pain continued, and her blood pressure dropped more. They planned to remove a catheter and do a CT scan. Dr. Anne B. Whitehurst, an infectious-disease specialist, was brought in, as well. She went into cardiopulmonary arrest and could not be revived. P sued Ds asserting in part that the failure to remove the catheter led to septicemia and systematic inflammatory response syndrome, and that was the proximate cause of her death. The main issue to be resolved by the jury was whether Dr. Laney (D) breached the applicable standard of care by deciding to treat the infection with antibiotics and to leave the allegedly infected catheter in place since it was the only access for dialysis. The jury returned a verdict for $1,000,000, which included $200,000 in economic damages and $800,000 in noneconomic damages. D appealed. One of the issues was whether P’s improper comments and arguments, including that the damages should represent 'the value of a human life' were error.