Nature of the Case
To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.
Facts
P was seriously injured in a single-vehicle accident in which he sustained a mild-to-moderate concussion and multiple facial fractures. P had a blood alcohol level of .13%, which extrapolated to approximately .20% at the time of the accident. P remained in stable condition but suffered from 'severe agitation.' This was attributed to alcohol withdrawal. P was given unusually large doses of Valium, Fentanyl, and other drugs to keep him sedated. On his fourth day at D, P continued to show signs of alcohol withdrawal and received large doses of medication to control his agitation. CT scans were ordered that day in preparation for reconstructive surgery to treat his facial fractures. D administered a paralytic drug to P in preparation for the CT scans. P was unable to move or breathe on his own and became completely dependent on the portable ventilator. After the scans were completed, P's complexion was 'pink' and that he was breathing when he came out of the scanner. Shortly after P was moved to his bed, someone noticed that he had turned gray and was not breathing. P's heart had stopped. P was successfully resuscitated, but he sustained severe and permanent brain damage. P has remained in a persistent vegetative state. P sued D claiming that P was attached to an oxygen tank that was only half-full and that the tank ran out of oxygen during the CT scans. P claimed that D failed to appropriately monitor P during the procedure and that they failed to activate or turned off the alarms on the cardiac monitor and the portable ventilator. The jury returned a verdict in favor P, setting damages in the amount of $7,366,000. The jury apportioned 70% of the fault to D and 30% of the fault to P. Based on the jury's verdict, the trial court entered an order of judgment awarding P $5,156,200. P filed a motion pursuant to Rule 50.02 of the Tennessee Rules of Civil Procedure, seeking a judgment entered for $7,366,000, the full amount of damages found by the jury. D filed a motion for a new trial or, alternatively, for remittitur. The trial court denied D's motions but granted P's Rule 50.02 motion. The court ruled that the injury sustained by P was, as a matter of law, a separate and distinct injury for which P was not at fault. The court, therefore, ruled that Vanderbilt was 100% at fault and entered a judgment against Vanderbilt for the full amount of the damages found by the jury. The Court of Appeals held that the trial court erred in granting the Rule 50.02 motion. The Court of Appeals, therefore, reversed the judgment of the trial court and remanded the case for a new trial. P appealed.
Support@ bsmsphd.com
Casebriefs Co