WPC* # t U: % 0 w@ 4   # 0J) 0Ts 0^ 0h% 0r 0| 0 0  1u 0dU *rB) BDC AM%r{ D3J= 0@v~1v AO&& 0D' D/' B ( 0?'( 0Df*HP LaserJet 4HPPCL5MS,,,,,,0nLd,cAZ"Arial RegularX(~$  HTR[A' LegalLh (Avery 4167 Post CardA' Legalh (Avery 4167 Post CardTXmXXX73XXdXXd7 jPklmUnopqUrsӀڃ"<3|x~H2 0Indent123  2" 0Indent20 23  2, 0Indent30 0 23  26 0Indent40 0 0 23  2@ 0Indent50 0 0 0 23  2J 0Indent60 0 0 0 0 23  2T 0Indent70 0 0 0 0 0 23  2^ 0Indent80 0 0 0 0 0 0 23   ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P 8Mac DefaultMac Default ` X<  9p`(Arial% Line 7 d d####7Border 1dd-%C << G  !  #d#"    H \RA'\#d#  "   YYY FILED"X July24,1997CecilCrowson,Jr."AppellateCourtClerk  q !  #d#"    H \RA'\#d#  $       TheSweetwaterHospitalwasvoluntarilydismissed. | !#d#"    H \RA'\#d#  $       Inresponsetoamotionbytheplaintiffforapartialsummaryjudgment.$$$$'dxd  !#d#"    H \RA'\#d#  $       Willardv.Claborn,419S.W.2d168(Tenn.1967)isexplicativeofthedoctrine.Abeneficiarymaymaintainanactioninhisownnameagainstthepromisorwherethepromisebetweenthepromisorandthepromiseeismadeuponsufficientconsiderationforthebenefitofthethirdpartybeneficiary,whowillbeoneofthreetypes:adoneebeneficiary,acreditorbeneficiary,andanincidentalbeneficiary.Thelatterhadnostandingtosue.Presumably,thetrialjudgewhoheldthatthedecedentwasathirdpartybeneficiary,didsounderthecreditortheory.Theappelleedoesnotquestionthisholding.Thetrialcourtwentfurther,asstated,andheldnobreachwasproved.  !#d#"    H \RA'\#d#  $       Recitalsmayhaveamaterialinfluenceinconstruingthecontractanddeterminingtheintentoftheparties,andinsuchrespecttheyshould,asfaraspossible,bereconciledwiththeoperativeclausesandbegiveneffect.Generallyiftherecitalsinacontractareclearandtheoperativepartisambiguous,therecitalsgovern...17AmJurContractssec.268.("$    PtPtHH(FG(HH(d'hStyl{WP}01  HH  2$HH  Geneva  <Px443!#4$*$$*$ KK  Geneva  Geneva .,6 Geneva   h HD: Geneva  h HD: Geneva -C<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$   1  ' dxdP Pd((3 $ ~!  HTR[A' Legal3'A' Legal3'TXʢXXX7ʢXXdd7   `   0  (#$  0   ! . "    H \RA'\#Xd##Xd#    R&'%A1-j|` . `@Rߛ INTHECOURTOFAPPEALSOFTENNESSEEEASTERNSECTION   STEFONEMcCLENDON,fatherof )DAMIENOSHAYMAURICE  ) KNOXCIRCUITMcCLENDON,thenextofkinof  )CYNTHIAVANESSAFRANCIS,  ) NO.03A019703CV00083      ) PlaintiffAppellant   )      )v.      ) HON.DALEC.WORKMAN,      ) JUDGEDR.BENNETTT.CROWDER,II,and )EMERGENCYCOVERAGE  )CORPORATION,    )      ) REVERSEDand DefendantsAppellees  ) REMANDED̜H.NaillFalls,Jr.andJamesB.Johnson,Nashville,forAppellantJamesH.LondonandMargaretG.Klein,Knoxville,forAppellee   OPINION  Ӝ̛        INMAN,SeniorJudge̛̜  ThisisanactionfordamagesforthedeathofCynthiaFrancisallegedlycausedbythemalpracticeofDr.BennettCrowder,II,anemergencyroomphysicianwhowasacontractphysicianwiththedefendantEmergencyCoverageCorporationwhichhadcontractedwiththeSweetwaterHospital (   ׀tooperateitsemergencyroom. Accordingtothecomplaint,Ms.Francis,whowas19yearsold,onJanuary29and22,1996,beingacutelyill,presentedherselfattheemergencyroomandwastwicemistakenlydiagnosedassufferingfromanupperrespiratorydiseasebyDr.Crowder,whoprescribedtreatmentaccordingly,wheninfactshewassufferingfromdiabetesandwasinextremis,shortlyexpiringatanotherhospital. TheplaintiffallegedthatthemedicalcarerenderedbyDr.Crowderwasrecklessandconstitutedagrossdeviationfromacceptedstandardsofprofessionalpractice. TheonlyallegationastotheEmergencyCoverageCorporation(ECC)isasfollows:  Ӝ̛8 16.8 AsapatientatSweetwaterHospital,CynthiaFranciswasathirdpartybeneficiaryofthecontractbetweenEmergencyCoverageCorporationandSweetwaterHospital.PlaintiffisthereforeentitledtorecovercompensatorydamagesfromEmergencyCoverageCorporationintheamountofatleast$3,000,000.00. TheECCfiledaRule12.02(c)motiontodismissforfailuretostateaclaim,assertingthatthe complaintcontainsamereconclusoryallegationregardingthedecedentsthirdpartybeneficiarystatus;evenifthiswerethecase,therearenofactsindicatingthatEECeverbreachedtheunderlyingcontract.̛   ThesolepurposeofaRule12.02(c)motionistotestthelegalsufficiencyofthecomplaint.Sandersv.Vinson,558S.W.2d838(Tenn.1977);Hollowayv.PutnamCounty,534S.W.2d292(Tenn.1976),citedinDobbsv.Guenther,846S.W.2d270(Tenn.App.1992).ThistestrequiresthisCourttotakeallthewellpleaded,materialfactualallegationsastrueandtoconstruethecomplaintliberallyinfavoroftheplaintiff.Lewisv.Allen,698S.W.2d58(Tenn.1985). ThetrialcourtfoundthatthedeceasedwasathirdpartybeneficiaryofthecontractbetweenEECandSweetwaterHospital, )   ׀butthatthecontractwasnotbreachedbyECC.ThemotionofECCtodismisswasthereforegrantedforfailuretostateaclaim.WhetherthedismissalofECCwasproperisthesoleissueonϜappeal.̛  ThecontractbetweenECCandSweetwaterHospitalprovides,aspertinenthere:  8 H@` ` ` H@`  AGREEMENT  8  ThisAgreementmadeeffectivethe1stdayofOctober,1993,byandbetweenSWEETWATERHOSPITALASSOCIATION,ahospitaloperatinginSweetwater,Tennessee,( Hospital),andEMERGENCYCOVERAGECORPORATION( ECC).   RECITALS  8  A.TheHospitaloperatesanEmergencyDepartment,whichrequiresphysicianswhohavethetraining,experience,andqualificationsnecessarytopracticemedicineasemergencyphysicians.8  B.TheHospitalhasdeterminedthatforproperandefficientoperationoftheEmergencyDepartmentseveralobjectivesmustbemet,including,24hourcoverage,coordinationofschedulesandassignments,administrativeeaseandefficiency,consistencyanduniformityinbookandrecordkeeping,coordinateddirectionofnonphysicianpersonnel,andqualitypatientcare.8  C.TheHospitalhasdeterminedthattheproper,orderlyandefficientdeliveryofqualityemergencyservicescanbeaccomplishedbestbyenteringintoanexclusivecoveragearrangementwithECC.8  D.ECCprovidesindependentcontractorphysicianstorenderemergencymedicalservicesathospitals.ECCiswillingtoaccepttheresponsibilityofprovidingsaidphysicianstorenderemergencymedicalservicesintheEmergencyDepartmentinaccordancewithrecognizedmedicalstandards,thebylawsoftheMedicalStaffoftheHospital( MedicalStaff),thepoliciesandproceduresoftheHospital,andthetermsandconditionssetforthinthisagreement.8  E.ECCwill,atitsexpense,contractwithEmergencyPhysicians( Physicians)torenderemergencymedicalservicesatHospital.ForpurposesofthisAgreement,theterm Physicianor PhysiciansshallmeanphysiciansrenderingemergencymedicalservicesattheHospitalbyandthroughcontractualagreementsbetweensuchphysiciansandECC.8  F.TheHospitalandECCdesiretoprovideafullstatementoftheiragreementinconnectionwiththeoperationoftheDepartmentduringthetermofthisAgreement.8  Accordingly,thepartiesagreeasfollows:8  I.OBLIGATIONSOFECC.ECCagreestothefollowing:8  1.MedicalServices.ECCshallprovidePhysicianstostafftheEmergencyDepartmentandrenderemergencymedicalservicestwentyfour(24)hoursperday,seven(7)daysperweek,fiftytwo(52)weeksperyeartoallpatientswhopresentthemselvesintheEmergencyDepartment,providedthosepatientsdesiretreatmentbysaidPhysicians.PhysiciansarenotresponsibleforanypatientwhopresentstotheEmergencyDepartmentandchoosesanyotherexaminationandtreatmentoptionsofferedbyHospitalpersonnel.HospitalacknowledgesthatECCwillperformitsobligationsthroughcontractswithPhysicianswhoareindependentcontractorsandnotemployeesofECCorHospital,providedPhysiciansmeettherequirementssetforthhereinwithrespecttoqualifications.    . . . . . . .   ThethrustoftheplaintiffsargumentonappealisdirectedtotheContractRecitalthat:8 ...ECCiswillingtoaccepttheresponsibilityofprovidingsaidPhysicianstorenderemergencymedicalservicesintheEmergencyDepartmentinaccordancewithrecognizedmedicalstandards... TheargumentcontinuesthatthecontractwasbreachedsinceECCagreedtoaccepttheresponsibilitytoprovidephysicianstorendermedicalservicesinaccordancewithrecognizedmedicalstandards,andthatDr.Crowderfailedtodoso.Sincethedeceasedwasathirdpartybeneficiaryofthecontract,plaintiffarguesthat,ipsofacto,sheisentitledtodamagesforsuchbreach. TheplaintiffdoesnotallegethatECCisvicariouslyliablefortheallegednegligenceofDr.Crowder,anditiswellsettledthatordinarilyapartyisnotliableforthenegligenceofanindependentcontractor,Carrv.Carr,726S.W.2d932(Tenn.App.1986).ECCisa staffingcompany,andinitiallyfulfilleditscontractualobligationsbyfurnishingaMedicalDirectorandindependentcontractorphysiciansacceptabletotheHospital.TheplaintiffdoesnotallegethatDr.CrowderwasincompetentorunlicensedorthatECCwasnegligentinpresentinghimtotheHospitalforapproval;rather,theplaintiffarguesthatbecauseofthelanguageoftheRecital,ECCbreachedthecontractwhenDr.Crowderfailedtorendermedicalservicesinaccordancewithrecognizedmedicalstandards. TheplaintiffalsoarguesthattherulingbythetrialcourtthatECCdidnotbreachitscontractwiththeHospitalwentimpermissiblybeyondthescopeoftheRule12.02(c)motion,becauseECCexpresslyagreedtobeliablewhenitscontractualphysicians failedtoperformuptorecognizedmedicalstandards.  ThequotedRecital,towhichwemaylooktoascertaintheintentoftheparties,17AmJurContracts,Sec.268,recitesthatthephysiciansprovidedbyitwillrendermedicalservices inaccordancewithrecognizedmedicalstandards.Anyactofmedicalmalpracticeresultingininjuryasaproximatecausearguablyfallsbelowtherecognizedstandard,andifthetheoryoftheappellantiscorrectECCtherebybecomesliableundertheRecitaltoanyERpatientwhobyvirtueofseekingERtreatmentbecomesathirdpartybeneficiarytothecontract. +   ׀DidtheallegednegligentactsofDr.CrowderconstituteabreachofthecontractbetweenECCandtheHospital?Wethinkso,inlightofthelanguageoftheRecital. TheRecital ,   ׀istheonlyprovisionofthecontractwhichidentifiesthespecificdutiesthatECCagreedtoperform.ItwillbeseenthatECCdidnotmerelyagreetoprovide qualifiedphysicians;itagreedtoprovidephysicianstorenderservices inaccordancewithrecognizedmedicalstandards. Inthecaseathand,wemust takeitastruethatDr.Crowderfailedto renderservicesinaccordancewithrecognizedmedicalstandards.WemustalsotakeastruethatthedeceasedwasathirdpartybeneficiaryofthecontractbetweenECCandtheHospital,sincethereisnoappealfromtheholdingofthetrialcourttothateffect.TheconclusionthereuponlogicallyfollowsthatECCwasimprovidentlydismissedfromthiscase. Reversedandremanded,withcostsassessedtoECC.      _____________________________       WilliamH.Inman,SeniorJudge̜CONCUR:     ̜_______________________________HoustonM.Goddard,PresidingJudge_______________________________DonT.McMurray,Judge%  Ԁ%  Ԁ