A Divided Middle Section Modifies Med Mal Summary Judgment

DORIS HINKLE, ET AL. v. KINDRED HOSPITAL, ET AL.
With a concurring in part and dissenting in part opinion

Court: TN Court of Appeals

Attorneys:

Bede O. M. Anyanwu, Jackson, Tennessee, for the appellant, Doris Hinkle, Executrix of the estate of Muriel Jesse Hinkle deceased, and Doris Hinkle.

Heidi Anne Barcus, Hillary Browning Jones, Daniel T. Swanson, Knoxville, Tennessee, for the appellee, Dr. Tuan Quoc Nguyen; Harry Peoples Ogden, Kenny L. Saffles, Carrie C. McCutcheon, Knoxville, Tennessee, for the appellee, Kindred Hospital.

Judge: COTTRELL

The widow of a man who suffered a devastating injury while undergoing a medical procedure in the defendant hospital filed suit against the hospital and the doctor who ordered the procedure, claiming medical malpractice, failure to obtain informed consent, and battery. The defendant hospital filed a motion for summary judgment, and the defendant doctor filed a motion to dismiss, both arguing that the plaintiff’s malpractice claims had to be dismissed because she failed to strictly comply with requirements of the Medical Malpractice Act, specifically Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-26-121 (a)(1) (60-day notice) and §29-26-122(a) (certificate of good faith). The trial court granted both motions in part and denied them in part. We reverse the trial court’s dismissal of the medical malpractice claims against both defendants as well as the related claims. We also reverse the trial court’s dismissal of the claim against the defendant doctor for failure to obtain the patient’s informed consent, but we affirm its dismissal of the medical battery claim against the defendant doctor.

.PDF Version of Dissent

.PDF Version of Case

Comment on Article