Quimbee logo
DMCA.com Protection Status

Lection v. Dyll

65 S.W.3d 696 (2001)

Case BriefRelatedOptions
From our private database of 35,600+ case briefs...

Lection v. Dyll

Texas Court of Appeals

65 S.W.3d 696 (2001)

Facts

Sandra Lection (plaintiff) was taken to the emergency room with several neurological symptoms, including slurred speech, dizziness, and a severe headache. The emergency physician on duty performed an examination, ordered a few tests, and paged the neurologist on call, Dr. Louis Dyll (defendant). Dyll was required to serve as an on-call physician for the emergency room as part of his contract with the hospital and to provide treatment and medical decisions upon request of the on-call emergency physician. The emergency physician gave Lection’s test results to Dyll via telephone, and Dyll stated that Lection did not need to be admitted to the hospital because she required no further treatment and likely was suffering from a hemiplegic migraine. Dyll told the physician to have Lection come to his office the following week. Accounts from the emergency physician, attending nurses, hospital medical records, and Lection herself conflicted as to whether Lection left the hospital during the phone call with Dyll or after the physician relayed Dyll’s comments to Lection. According to Lection and her husband, the emergency physician told her to go home because she had suffered a hemiplegic migraine. The next morning, Lection suffered a disabling stroke. Lection filed a medical-malpractice suit against Dyll. Dyll moved for summary judgment, claiming that no physician-patient relationship existed because Lection left the hospital and Dyll’s phone call did not create a duty of care. The trial court rendered a take-nothing summary judgment against Lection, and Lection appealed.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Fitzgerald, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 619,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 619,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 35,600 briefs, keyed to 984 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.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 619,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 35,600 briefs - keyed to 984 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership