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: |
|
|