NKC Hospitals, Inc. v. Anthony
1993 Ky. App. LEXIS 44, 1993 WL 75941, 849 S.W.2d 564 (1993)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
An original negligent act is not superseded by a subsequent intervening negligent act if the intervening act was a reasonably foreseeable consequence of the risk created by the original actor's conduct.
Facts:
- Margaret Anthony, a 26-year-old woman who was 30 weeks pregnant, went to the emergency room of Norton Hospital on September 5, 1989, for nausea, vomiting, and abdominal pain.
- In the obstetrical unit, Nurse Rebecca Moore assessed Anthony and communicated by phone with her primary physician, Dr. Elizabeth Hawkins.
- Despite Anthony's extreme pain, Dr. Hawkins, believing it was a urinary tract infection, ordered her discharge over the phone without ever examining her.
- The on-duty resident physician, Dr. Mikael Love, did not examine Anthony, although he apparently wrote the prescription for morphine ordered by Dr. Hawkins.
- At 6 a.m. on September 6, Anthony was discharged from the hospital while still experiencing significant pain.
- Four hours later, at 10 a.m., Anthony was re-admitted to the same hospital under the personal care of Dr. Hawkins.
- On September 9, it was discovered that Anthony had a perforated appendix. Her baby was delivered by caesarean section.
- On September 25, 1989, Anthony died from acute adult respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), a complication resulting from the delayed diagnosis and treatment of her appendicitis.
Procedural Posture:
- The estate of Margaret Anthony filed a medical negligence lawsuit against NKC Hospitals, Inc. (Norton Hospital) and Dr. Elizabeth Hawkins in the Jefferson Circuit Court (trial court).
- The claim against Dr. Hawkins was settled prior to trial.
- The case against NKC Hospitals, Inc. proceeded to a jury trial.
- The jury found for the estate, apportioning 35% of the fault to the hospital and 65% to Dr. Hawkins.
- The trial court entered judgment against the hospital for its 35% share of the total damages.
- The hospital's motions for a directed verdict and for judgment notwithstanding the verdict were denied by the trial court.
- NKC Hospitals, Inc. appealed the judgment to the Court of Appeals of Kentucky.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a primary care physician's subsequent negligence in failing to diagnose a patient's condition upon re-admission supersede the hospital's initial negligence in prematurely discharging that patient without a physician's examination?
Opinions:
Majority - McDonald, J.
No. The physician's subsequent negligence does not supersede the hospital's initial negligence because the subsequent negligence was a foreseeable result of the risk created by the hospital's actions. The hospital's failure to have a physician examine the patient before discharge was a substantial factor in causing the patient's death. The hospital had an independent duty of care to Margaret Anthony which it breached by discharging her in pain without a physician's examination, an omission that created a foreseeable risk of further harm. The court found that the hospital staff was aware of the patient's severe pain and had reservations about the discharge order, making it foreseeable that Dr. Hawkins's continued negligence could lead to injury. Relying on the Restatement (Second) of Torts § 442B, the court concluded that where an actor's negligence creates or increases the risk of a particular harm and is a substantial factor in causing it, an intervening force does not relieve the actor of liability.
Dissenting - Wilhoit, J.
Yes. The negligence of Dr. Hawkins superseded the hospital's initial negligence and became the sole legal cause of Margaret Anthony's death. Once Anthony was re-admitted, she was under the exclusive control of Dr. Hawkins, who had ample time—over 32 hours—to make a correct diagnosis that expert testimony suggested should have taken only three hours. The hospital committed no further negligence after re-admission and had no right to interfere with Dr. Hawkins's treatment. Therefore, the subsequent negligence of the physician was so significant that it broke the chain of causation from the hospital's original error, making it a superseding cause under the principles of the Restatement (Second) of Torts § 452(2).
Analysis:
This case clarifies the limits of the superseding cause doctrine in medical malpractice litigation involving multiple tortfeasors. The ruling establishes that a hospital cannot easily deflect liability for its own negligence by arguing that a subsequent doctor's malpractice was the superseding cause of injury. By focusing on the foreseeability of the subsequent negligence, the decision reinforces that an initial actor's duty of care extends to protecting against foreseeable subsequent failures by others. This precedent makes it more difficult for institutional defendants to escape liability when their initial breach of care sets the stage for a subsequent, predictable medical error.
