Weeks v. Byrd Medical Clinic
Louisiana Court of Appeal
927 So. 2d 594 (2006)
- Written by Abby Roughton, JD
Facts
Goldia Neystel was admitted to a senior-care unit at Byrd Hospital (defendant) on February 25, 1997. The hospital noted that Neystel was at high risk of falling and classified Neystel as a patient who required observation and contact from nursing staff at least every 15 minutes. On March 18, 1997, Neystel fell and fractured her hip while trying to get out of bed to use the toilet. Neystel died three days later. Neystel’s daughter, Theresa Weeks (plaintiff), brought a negligence action against Byrd Hospital, Byrd Medical Clinic, Inc. (defendant), and other entities. Weeks alleged that the hospital had breached the standard of care it owed to Neystel. During discovery in the action, Neystel’s treating psychiatrist, Dr. Frank Covington, testified in his deposition that on March 19, 1997, Neystel told Covington that she tried to call nursing staff several times to help her get out of bed but could not wait any longer and was trying to get out of bed on her own when she fell. However, other evidence in the record established that nursing staff checked on Neystel every 15 minutes. The hospital moved for summary judgment, and the trial court granted the motion. Weeks appealed to the Louisiana Court of Appeal, arguing that Covington’s testimony established that the hospital breached the standard of care. The hospital argued that Covington’s testimony was inadmissible hearsay that did not create a genuine issue of material fact on the standard-of-care issue.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Ezell, 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.