100%(5)5 out of 5 people found this document helpful
This preview shows page 2 - 4 out of 5 pages.
The first case is Tisdale v. Toledo Hospital in the Court of Appeals of Ohio Sixth Appellate District Lucas County. The Tisdales filed a complaint again the hospital for medical-negligence, medical-malpractice, and loss-of-consortium. Mr. Tisdale was brought into the hospital for abdominal surgery with a known history of deep vein thrombosis (DVT). The two doctors involved ordered for external-pressure leg cuffs be used to prevent blood clots from forming. However, the cuffs were never put on by the nurses, nor did the physicians follow up
3Respondeat Superioron their order. These actions resulted in a pulmonary embolism that caused brain damage and loss of vision.The Tisdales used the respondeat superior doctrine to sue the hospital for the negligence of their staff that resulted in injury. However, the court stated “the liability of an employer for the negligence of the employee is secondary or passive, while the latter’s liability isprimary. The Tisdales did not name the specific doctors or nurses that were involved in the disregard of the leg cuffs, and they dismissed all defendants leaving the hospital as the sole defendant. According to the jury, the hospital was negligent. However, its negligence was not the cause of Mr. Tisdale’s injuries.The Tisdales continued to appeal the jury’s decision which was dismissed again. The hospital stated that “it could not be vicariously liable based on the acts of individual nurse-employees who were never made party-defendants and, second that the Tisdales were barred from continuing their suit against the hospital because of the statute of limitations had expired as to the nurses. “ (Tisdale v. Toledo Hosp).