Reynolds v. Decatur Memorial Hospital

660 N.E.2d 235 (1996)

From our private database of 46,500+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Reynolds v. Decatur Memorial Hospital

Illinois Appellate Court
660 N.E.2d 235 (1996)

Facts

Kevin Reynolds (plaintiff) was a two-year-old boy who went to the emergency room at Decatur Memorial Hospital (defendant). Kevin’s mother said that he had fallen from a two-foot-tall couch, walked to her, and then gradually went limp. Kevin had a fever, breathing difficulties, and unresponsive muscles below his neck. However, cervical X-rays showed that his neck looked normal. Dr. Sharon Bonds examined Kevin and believed he might have an infection. At 2:00 a.m., Bonds called a neurologist, Dr. Thomas Fulbright (defendant), at home to discuss Kevin’s case. Fulbright asked Bonds whether Kevin had a stiff neck. Bonds checked Kevin’s neck and reported that it was stiff. Fulbright suggested that Bonds get a spinal tap to look for possible infectious diseases. Bonds did not ask Fulbright to see or treat Kevin. Fulbright often provided informal advice to his colleagues about neurological matters and testified that he thought of this call as an informal conference with Bonds. Fulbright did not view the call as providing medical care for Kevin and did not bill for it. Fulbright had no further contact with Kevin’s case. Bonds treated Kevin for a possible infection. However, Kevin had severed the spinal cord in his neck and became a quadriplegic. A lawsuit was filed on Kevin’s behalf, suing the hospital and Fulbright for medical malpractice. The trial court found that the call between Bonds and Fulbright did not create a physician-patient relationship between Fulbright and Kevin and, therefore, that Fulbright did not owe any legal duty of care to Kevin. Kevin appealed.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (McCullough, 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 832,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  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.

Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 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 832,000 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
  • 46,500 briefs - keyed to 994 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