Wednesday, May 1, 2013

Case analysis

                     MEJIA V. COMMUNITY HOSPITAL OF SAN BERNARDINO


                Procedure
A.    Who are the parties?
1.                  Maria Del Carmen Mejia (Plaintiff) vs.
2.                  Community Hospital of San Bernardino (Respondent)
3.                  The ER Physician (Defendant)
4.                  Radiologist and his employer MSB Radiology Medical Group (Defendant)
5.                  Emergency Physicians Medical Group (Defendant)
B.     Who brought the action?
1.      Mejia, the plaintiff.
C.     In what court did the case originate?
1.      Court of Appeal, Fourth District, Division 2, California
D.    Who won at the trial-court level?
1.       The defendants
E.     What is the appellate history of the case?
1.      The case proceeded to trial, where respondent successfully moved for a nonsuit immediately after the close of the plaintiff’s case. Regarding the remaining defendants, the jury found that the radiologist and his employer, MSB Radiology, were negligent, but the ER physician and his employer, Emergency Physicians Medical Group, were not.

                Facts
A.    What are the relevant facts as recited by this court?
1.                  On May 3, 1997 the plaintiff awoke in severe pain with her neck twisted to one side.
2.                  Her mother convinced her to go to the emergency room.
3.                  The plaintiff arrived at 3:00 AM and was examined by an emergency room physician.
4.                  The physician prescribed her hydrocodone, acetaminophen, a tranquilizer, and also ordered X-rays.
5.                  The X-rays were sent to at least one X-ray on-call Radiologist for evaluation.
6.                  The radiologist noticed congenital fusion in the patient.
7.                  Shortly after, the plaintiff experienced severe vomiting and nausea.
8.                  The nausea was so severe that after the final vomiting occurrence her head needed to be lifted out of the toilet.
9.                  The next morning the plaintiff awoke and was experiencing pain in her neck, loss of movement in her limbs, as well as numbness throughout her body.
 
                   Holding

1.                  The court found the radiologist and his employer, MSB Radiology, were negligent.
2.                  The ER physician and his employer, Emergency Physicians Medical group were not.
3.                  The respondent received a nonsuit. 

                   Rational
 
1.   The court decision was overturned, due to the lack of evidence brought by Meji.  

                   Implications

A.    What does the case mean for healthcare today?
All Healthcare providers must be aware of all guidelines and must pay attention to detail especially when dealing with emergency room patients