Etheridge v. Medical Center Hospitals
Virginia Supreme Court
376 S.E.2d 525 (1989)
- Written by Craig Conway, LLM
Facts
Richie Lee Wilson, a healthy 35-year-old mother of three and licensed nurse, underwent surgery performed by Dr. Clarence Trower, Jr., to restore a deteriorating jaw bone. The procedure consisted of removing a five-inch-long piece of Wilson’s rib bone and the subsequent grafting of the reshaped rib bone to Wilson’s jaw by an oral surgeon. As a result of Trower’s negligence, Wilson sustained severe and permanent injuries, including brain damage with limited memory and intelligence. Further, Wilson was paralyzed on her lift side, was confined to a wheelchair, and was unable to care for herself or her children. On behalf of Wilson, Louise Etheridge and Larry Dodd (plaintiffs) filed suit against Medical Center Hospitals (defendant) and Donald Gordon, the executor of the estate of Dr. Trower, who had since died, alleging that the defendants were jointly and severally liable for damages. At trial, the evidence showed that Wilson had spent more than $300,000 for care and medical treatment to date, but that she would incur additional, substantial expenses for the remainder of her life, which was estimated to be 39.9 years. At the close of the evidence, plaintiffs claimed they proved an economic loss in excess of $1.9 million. However, the jury held in favor of plaintiffs and awarded $2.75 million in damages against both defendants. However, pursuant to state law, the trial court reduced the judgment to $750,000. Wilson appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Stephenson, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 805,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.