Ware v. Timmons
Alabama Supreme Court
954 So. 2d 545 (2006)
- Written by Abby Roughton, JD
Facts
Seventeen-year-old Brandi Timmons died from brain damage that she suffered while recovering from anesthesia after an elective surgery. Brandi’s mother, Johnnie Timmons (plaintiff), brought a medical-malpractice and wrongful-death action against anesthesiologist William Ware, nurse anesthetist Lil Hayes, and their employer, Anesthesiology & Pain Medicine of Montgomery, P.C. (APM) (defendants). Timmons alleged that following the surgery, Hayes had provided treatment to Brandi that fell below the standard of care. Timmons further alleged that Ware and APM were vicariously liable for Hayes’s conduct as her supervising anesthesiologist and employer, respectively. At trial, Ware asserted that he could not be held vicariously liable for Hayes’s conduct because she was an employee of APM and not of Ware individually. However, the trial court instructed the jury that agency and vicarious liability were not disputed in the case, meaning that if the jury returned a verdict in Timmons’s favor against Hayes, the jury also had to return a verdict in Timmons’s favor against Ware and APM. The jury returned a verdict against Hayes, Ware, and APM, and the trial court awarded Timmons $13.7 million in accordance with the jury’s verdict. Ware, Hayes, and APM appealed the judgment. On appeal, Ware challenged the trial court’s jury instruction and contended that he could not be held vicariously liable for Hayes’s actions under the doctrine of respondeat superior because he and Hayes were co-employees of APM. Timmons countered that Ware was the supervising anesthesiologist and had a right of control over Hayes’s acts and omissions that supported imposing vicarious liability. Timmons also asserted that Ware was vicariously liable under Alabama law because he was a professional practicing in a professional corporation and was a shareholder in APM.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (See, J.)
Dissent (Harwood, J.)
What to do next…
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.