ASSOCIATION FOR RETARDED CITIZENS-VOLUSIA V. FLETCHER
741 So.2d 520 (Fl.App. 1999)
NATURE OF THE CASE: Association (D) appealed a decision that awarded damages to Fletcher
(P) in a wrongful death action resulting from the death of her son who attended a summer
camp operated by D.
FACTS: D is a nonprofit organization that has provided services and programs to persons
with developmental disabilities in Volusia County since 1962. D has a summer camp. P's son,
Nathan, was seventeen years old and had a severe developmental disability and suffered grand
mal seizures. P indicated that Nathan suffered from grand mal seizures and was taking
prescription medication for this condition. This information was not shared with Nathan's
camp counselor or the pool lifeguards. During pool activities, the counselors were in the
pool with the campers and were required to 'watch them, stay with them, and realize that
they're in the water.' A lifeguard was also on duty and had the responsibility of watching
the campers while they were in the pool in addition to placing drops in their ears as they
exited the pool. Nathan was required to remain in the shallow end of the pool. Nathan
crossed under the rope to a point in the deep end of the pool. Nathan's counselor noticed
that Nathan was face down in the deep end of the pool approximately thirty feet from where
he had last seen him. He was 'jerking around.' Nathan did not appear to be breathing, but
the lifeguard was able to resuscitate him. When he arrived at the medical center's emergency
room Nathan was confused and aggressive. Examination revealed that he had aspirated a
significant amount of water which had severely damaged his lungs. Nine days after he was
admitted to the hospital, Nathan died. The cause of his death was ARDS. P sued D. D denied
liability and asserted the affirmative defense that Nathan's wrongful death was caused by
the negligent medical care provided to him after the swimming accident. P moved for summary
judgment on D's affirmative defense contending that, as a matter of law, the defense was
inapplicable because the allegedly negligent care providers 'are not joint tortfeasors with
D. The Florida Legislature which abrogation of the common law theory of joint and several
liability in favor of the allocation of fault among tortfeasors was not intended to apply to
medical professionals who subsequently provided negligent treatment aggravating a
plaintiff's initial injury. The trial court entered summary judgment in favor of P thereby
prohibiting D from pleading, proving, or arguing that the medical providers who treated
Nathan after the accident negligently aggravated his injuries. D renewed its affirmative
defense at trial but neither expert testified that it was more likely that Nathan would have
survived the swimming accident had he been transported to a closer hospital. After hearing
the experts' testimony, the trial court let the earlier summary judgment ruling stand. P got
the verdict and D appealed.
ISSUE:
RULE OF LAW:
HOLDING AND DECISION:
LEGAL ANALYSIS:
Get
free access to the entire content for Mac, PC or Online
for 2-3 days and free samples
of all kinds of products.
for 2-3 days and free samples of all kinds of products.
https://bsmsphd.com
© 2007-2016 Abn Study Partner
No comments:
Post a Comment