Cases

Glass v. Continuing Care Nursing and Reh. Ctr., 2007 Phila. Ct. Com. Pl. LEXIS 79 (Phila. Ct. Com. Pl. 2007)

After a jury returned a verdict for the Estate, Defendants field a motion for new trial. The action was brought against the doctor, and the nursing home and several employees after resident suffered anoxic brain injury when she dislodged her tracheostomy tube. Prior to trial all parties except the doctor settled and the trial proceeded against the doctor alone. Among other matters, Plaintiffs’ expert testified that “[i]t is the responsibility of the attending physician to coordinate the patient’s care through counseling the nurses, issuing orders to the support staff and requesting consultations from appropriate specialists.” As a result of the testimony elicited on cross examination, the court concluded that it was error in failing to place some or all of the settling defendants’ names on the verdict sheet and that the error could have affected the outcome of the case. New trial was granted. Decided: March 15, 2007

Published by
David McGuffey

Recent Posts

Getting a recorded statement introduced in evidence

Elder law attorneys sometimes find themselves in various types of litigation ranging from guardianship cases,…

1 week ago

2027 Social Security COLA

Today the Social Security Administration announced the Cost of Living Adjustment for next year, posting…

2 weeks ago

Good Lawyers Solve Problems, They Don’t Create Them

Years ago I had the pleasure of knowing Arvin Reingold, a Chattanooga lawyer. He was…

4 weeks ago

Stock Research

When you're looking at investing, there is no substitute for qualified competent advice. Having said…

1 month ago

My Views on Investing

My thoughts on investing may or may not help you. I don't claim to be…

2 months ago

Amount of compensation; multiple conservators; forfeiture; renunciation; O.C.G.A. § 29-5-50

Compensation of the Conservator is generally addressed at O.C.G.A. § 29-5-50. There, the Code provides:…

4 months ago