WRITING MANUAL - Supreme Court - State of Ohio

{ 3} Once admitted, Jane was evaluated by Dr. Richard
Roe. He could not pinpoint a diagnosis, but he prescribed
ibuprofen to reduce the fever.
{ 4} At 4:30 p.m., Roe left Jane in the care of nurses. An
hour later, when she became agitated and began trying to pull out
her IV tubes, nurses tried to contact Roe. They were unable to
reach him, however, because contrary to hospital policy, he had
turned off his beeper and cell phone and left the building. Nurses
then called resident physician Francis Foe, who was on duty.
Without examining her personally and without inquiring what
medication Jane was taking, Dr. Foe prescribed a sedative and
ordered that Jane be restrained. By 6:10 p.m., Jane was asleep,
and for reasons unknown, nurses failed to check on her for the
next several hours. At 10:32 p.m., a nurse checking on Jane was
unable to wake her. Jane had lapsed into a persistent vegetative
state and will most likely never emerge.
{ 5} Jane’s vegetative state was caused by the interaction of
her depression medication and the sedative administered to
control her agitation, an interaction that is known to cause severe
harm or even death. It later emerged that Dr. Roe was
unavailable because he was drinking in a nearby bar.
B. Procedure
{ 6} Appellees John and Jean Doe, Jane’s parents, brought
this action against appellants, Drs. Roe and Foe and several
nurses, alleging negligence and recklessness in the care and
supervision of their daughter and seeking compensatory and
punitive damages. The hospital settled and was dismissed.
This heading will
cover the portion of
the opinion in which
the court considers the
arguments and
formulates its
holdings.
The several issues in
the Analysis portion of
the opinion may be
separated into
subheadings and subsubheadings.
Helpfulness to the
reader is the
touchstone.
{ 7} A jury trial commenced in July 2005. The jury found
for the Does and awarded them $10,288,667 in compensatory
damages and $20 million in punitive damages, the latter against
Drs. Roe and Foe only, allocating 25 percent to Foe and 75
percent to Roe. The court of appeals affirmed.
II. ANALYSIS
A. Physician Testimony on Standard of Care in Nursing
Profession
{ 8} Appellants argue that the trial court erred in refusing to
allow their physician-expert to testify as an expert regarding the
standard of care expected of a registered nurse. This is a question
of first impression in this state.
{ 9} To show that the nurses attending to Jane Doe did not
violate the applicable standard of care in failing to inform Dr.
Foe of Jane’s antidepressant medication and in not checking on
The Supreme Court of Ohio 141 Writing Manual