Nature of the Case
To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.
Facts
Mr. Molzof, a veteran, underwent lung surgery at a Veterans' Administration hospital in Madison, Wisconsin. After surgery, he was placed on a ventilator. The ventilator tube that was providing oxygen to him became disconnected. The ventilator's alarm system also was disconnected. Mr. Molzof was deprived of oxygen for approximately eight minutes before his predicament was discovered. Because of this unfortunate series of events, triggered by the hospital employees' conceded negligence, Mr. Molzof suffered irreversible brain damage, leaving him permanently comatose. Mr. Molzof's guardian ad litem (P) filed suit in District Court under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA or Act), seeking damages for supplemental medical care, future medical expenses, and loss of enjoyment of life. The Government (D) admitted liability, and the case proceeded to a bench trial on the issue of damages. The District Court determined that the free medical care being provided to Mr. Molzof by the veterans' hospital was reasonable and adequate, that Mrs. Molzof was satisfied with those services and had no intention of transferring Mr. Molzof to a private hospital, and that it was in Mr. Molzof's best interests to remain at the veterans' hospital, because neighboring hospitals could not provide a comparable level of care. In addition to ordering the veterans' hospital to continue the same level of care, the court awarded Mr. Molzof damages for supplemental care - physical therapy, respiratory therapy, and weekly doctor's visits - not provided by the veterans' hospital. It refused to award damages for medical care that would duplicate the free medical services already being provided by the veterans' hospital. It refused to award damages for loss of enjoyment of life. Mr. Molzof died after final judgment had been entered, and Mrs. Molzof was substituted as plaintiff in her capacity as personal representative of her late husband's estate. The United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit affirmed the District Court's judgment: given D's provision of free medical care to Mr. Molzof and Mrs. Molzof's apparent satisfaction with that care, any award for future medical expenses would be punitive in effect, and was therefore barred by the FTCA prohibition on 'punitive damages.' As for the loss of enjoyment of life, the Court of Appeals stated that Wisconsin law was unclear on the question whether a comatose plaintiff could recover such damages. Even if one could, it would be barred as punitive under the Federal Tort Claims Act, because 'an award of damages for loss of enjoyment of life can in no way recompense, reimburse or otherwise redress a comatose patient's uncognizable loss. . . .'
Support@ bsmsphd.com
Casebriefs Co