Ricks v. Budge

64 P.2d 208 (1937)

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

P injured his middle finger on barbed wire. It began to swell and redden. He went to the Budge Memorial Hospital to seek treatment. S.M. Budge (D) examined him and made two lateral incisions to reach the pus. D put a gauze wick in the incisions for drainage. P remained at the hospital for 4 more days and received the usual care and treatment for his injury. P intended to leave the hospital. Against the contradictory advice of D, to stay at the hospital until his condition improved, and after settling the amount due for the treatment, P left. When P left the hospital, D advised him to continue the same treatment and return at once to him if the finger worsened. Two days after leaving, P telephoned D explaining his condition and D told him to come in to his office. D called in D.C. Budge (D) who examined the hand, scraped it some, and indicated where it had to be opened. D told P to go back to the hospital. requested a different room, but was admitted to the same room as before. After the initial treatment by the nurse, D entered the room and alleged that P owed money for a prior treatment unrelated to the finger incident. D refused to treat P until all the prior bills were cleared. P decided to leave and went on to seek other treatment. P walked to Cache Valley Hospital, where he met Dr. Randall. Dr. Randall testified the condition of P’s hand when he arrived alleging that the hand along with two-third of his arm, was swollen. It required immediate surgical attention. After two weeks it became necessary to amputate P’s middle finger and remove an inch of the metacarpal bone. P had to stay for an additional two weeks as well. P sued Ds for negligence and the refusal to treat. When D had referred P back to the hospital P needed immediate surgical attention. P's hand was badly swollen; he was unable to move any of his fingers on that hand; that the hand was full of blisters which had broken and were oozing; and that blood was dripping from the places scraped by D. C. Budge (D). Ds contend: (1) That there was no contract of employment and in the absence of a valid contract they were not obligated to proceed with any treatment; and (2) that if there was such a contract, there was no evidence that the refusal of D to operate or take care of plaintiff resulted in any damage to P. Ds moved for a directed verdict and it was granted. P appealed.