| Venue: | OK Court of Civil Appeals |
| Facts: | Not clear who was driving, but Fritts and pal got in a one-car smash-up. Both were intoxicated. Fritts had a bad fracture of his facial bones. During surgery, he suddenly starts bleeding badly, loses consciousness, and dies. The gushing was apparently caused by the surgery-- that's not said explicitly, but it appears undisputed-- unusual arterial anatomy, it seems. |
| Posture: | Verdict for defendant (doctor) at trial. |
| Issue: | Should the evidence of Fritts's history of substance abuse have been admitted? And should the jury have been allowed to consider comparative negligence-- based on the events of the automobile accident-- as a basis for reducing recovery on the medical negligence claim? |
| Holding: | The evidence should be admitted to the extent that it has bearing on life expectancy (and therefore future earnings). It should not be made a part of the discussion of medical liability. The trial should have been bifurcated, so that there wouldn't be such prejudice. Reversed and remanded. |
| Rule: | A physician can't avoid liability for negligent treatment simply by assrting that the patient's injuries were caused by the patient's own negligence. |
| Reasoning: | People who have negligently injured thmselves are nevertheless entitled to non-negligent medical treatment. Negligence of a party which necessitates medical treatment is irrelevant to whether the treatment is negligent. |
| Dicta: | |