We do not at this time undertake to state the extent to which the reasoning of this case may be applied to other situations in which the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur is invoked. Parker & Stanbury, Harry D. Parker, Raymond G. Stanbury and Vernon W. Hunt for Respondents. After diagnosing Ybarra with appendicitis, Dr. Tilley set up an appendectomy for him that would be performed by Dr. Spangard at a hospital owned and managed by Dr. Plaintiff was rendered unconscious for the purpose of undergoing surgical treatment by the defendants; it is manifestly unreasonable for them to insist that he identify any one of them as the person who did the alleged negligent act. ), There is, however, some uncertainty as to the extent to which res ipsa loquitur may be invoked in cases of injury from medical treatment. 425, 432]; Ross v. Double Shoals Cotton Mills, 140 N.C. 115 [52 S.E. As pointed out above, if we accept the contention of defendants herein, there will rarely be any compensation for patients injured while unconscious. Ybarra v. Spangard, 154 P.2d 687 (Cal. This is in part due to the tendency, in some decisions, to lay undue emphasis on the limitations of the doctrine, and to give too little attention to its basic underlying purpose. Rev. Before the operation, Ybarra was placed on the operating table by Dr. Reser (defendant), an anesthetist. It should be enough that the plaintiff can show an injury resulting [25 Cal. 251 [7 P.2d 228, 231].) 128]; and see, also, Maki v. Murray Hospital, 91 Mont. The decisions in this state make it clear that such circumstances raise the inference of negligence, and call upon the defendant to explain the unusual result. Disclaimer: Justia Annotations is a forum for attorneys to summarize, comment on, and analyze case law published on our site. There may be, e.g., preparation for surgery by nurses [25 Cal. The number or relationship of the Ds alone does not determine whether the doctrine applies. Ybarra v. Spangard Supreme Court of CA - 1944 Facts: P consulted D about appendicitis and made arrangements for surgery. Prepared by Roger Martin ( http://people.qualcomm.com/rmartin/ ) 2. This is an action for damages for personal injuries alleged to have been inflicted on plaintiff by defendants during the course of a surgical operation. Any defendant who negligently injured him, and any defendant charged with his care who so neglected him as to allow injury to occur, would be liable. The general nature of the action and the relation of the several defendants thereto are set out in the opinion of the Supreme Court on the previous appeal (Ybarra v. Spangard, 25 Cal. 10. loquitur creates a presumption of negligence); Ybarra v. Spangard, 154 P.2d 687, 688-89 (Cal. After the operation, Ybarra woke up with pain in his arm, which implied that somehow during the operation someone did something to … (Ybarra v. Spangard (1944), 25 Cal.2d 486, 489, 494 [154 P.2d 687, 162 A.L.R. 2d 82 [64 P.2d 409]; Brown v. Shortlidge, 98 Cal.App 352 [277 P. This is a typical application of res ipsa loquitur to a situation in which it is impossible to find out who was responsible for an accident or how the events unfolded. 2d 486, 487-488 [154 P.2d 687, 162 A.L.R. JOSEPH ROMAN YBARRA, Appellant, v. LAWRENCE C. SPANGARD et al., Respondents. 170.) Marion P. Betty and Wycoff Westover for Appellant. Obviously in this case conditions (1) and (3) were met. 1072]; Carpenter, 10 So.Cal.L.Rev. Ybarra v. Spangard 25 Cal.2d 154 P.2d 687 (1944) Ybarra was in the hospital for an appendectomy performed by Spangard. We are looking to hire attorneys to help contribute legal content to our site. App. 1258]). 19067. [4] An examination of the recent cases, particularly in this state, discloses that the test of actual exclusive control of an instrumentality has not been strictly followed, but exceptions have been recognized where the purpose of the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur would otherwise be defeated. [154 P.2d 687, 162 A.L.R. If the doctrine is to continue to serve a useful purpose, we should not forget that "the particular force and justice of the rule, regarded as a presumption throwing upon the party charged the duty of producing evidence, consists in the circumstance that the chief evidence of the true cause, whether culpable or innocent, is practically accessible to him but inaccessible to the injured person." Swift. Swift and not of the other doctors. (Prosser, Torts, p. of Supreme Court of California opinions. 9. 1258]; Prosser on Torts, second ed. The principal basis for applying res ipsa loquitur in Ybarra apparently was the special circumstances of the medical personnel-patient relationship. If an internal link intending to refer to a specific person led you to this page, you may wish to change that link by … Al. Group doing surgery Information-forcing rule. 2 - Res Ipsa provides an injured plaintiff w/a common sense inference of negligence where direct proof of negligence is wanting. Dr. Spangard (defendant) performed the surgery, Dr. Reser (defendant) was the anesthesiologist seeing the They attack plaintiff's [25 Cal. 1258]). Both Gislor and Reser were employees of Swift, while Tilley and Spangard were independent contractors. (See Ales v. Ryan, 8 Cal. The pain did not cease, but spread down to the lower part of his arm, and after his release from the hospital the condition grew worse. He received further treatments from Dr. Tilley until March, 1940, and then returned to work, wearing his arm in a splint on the advice of Dr. Spangard. A perfect example of the liability of medical professionals can be shown in the case of Ybarra v. Spangard, 25 Cal.2d 486, 154 P.2d 687 (Cal.1944). Ybarra v. Spangard. Ybarra v. Spangard is a case study which deals with a specific situation when doctor’s mistake has lead to patient’s injury. Dec. 27, 1944. No. Ybarra: Appellant: Ybarra: Defendant: Respondent: ... and made arrangements for an appendectomy to be performed by defendant Dr. Spangard at a hospital owned and managed by defendant Dr. No. Ybarra v. Spangard was a leading case in California discussing the exclusive control element of res ipsa loquitur. Without the aid of the doctrine a patient who received permanent injuries of a serious character, obviously the result of someone's negligence, would be entirely unable to recover unless the doctors and nurses in attendance voluntarily chose to disclose the identity of the negligent person and the facts establishing liability. 268, briefed 10/30/94. One of the most interesting aspects of Ybarra vs. Spangard from a legal perspective is reasoning used by the court in finding that "a patient injured while unconscious on an operating table in a hospital could hold all or any of the persons who had any connection with the operation even though he could not select the particular acts by the particular person which led to his disability" (Louisell & Williams, 1960). Swift, adjusted plaintiff for [25 Cal. Get Byrne v. Boadle, 159 Eng. Facts: Plaintiff was diagnosed with appendicitis. Prepared by Roger Martin (http://people.qualcomm.com/rmartin/)2. 1955 (Hornbook Series), p. He complained to the nurse, and then to Dr. Tilley, who gave him diathermy treatments while he remained in the hospital. Listen to the audio pronunciation of Ybarra on pronouncekiwi. P consulted D about appendicitis and made arrangements for surgery. 251 [7 P.2d 228].) $0.99; $0.99; Publisher Description. 2d 486 (Cal. (9 Wigmore, Evidence [3d. McDougald v. Perry. 201.) Plaintiff was also examined by Dr. Fernando Garduno, who expressed the opinion that plaintiff's injury was a paralysis of traumatic origin, not arising from pathological causes, and not systemic, and that the injury resulted in atrophy, loss of use and restriction of motion of the right arm and shoulder. Ybarra v. Spangard - Ybarra v. Spangard was a leading case in California discussing the exclusive control element of res ipsa loquitur. Parker & Stanbury, Harry D. Parker, Raymond G. Stanbury and Vernon W. Hunt for Respondents. This is because every medical professional who was treating the plaintiff had a duty of care to protect his well-being, and all of the defendants at one stage had control of each of the potential instrumentalities. She contends that upon the record the jury should have been directed to find for her and that the evidence, as a matter of law, is insufficient to sustain the verdict. 187, 196. Design by Free CSS Templates. Finally, it has been suggested that the hospital cases may properly be considered exceptional, and that the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur "should apply with equal force in cases wherein medical and nursing staffs take the place of machinery and may, through carelessness or lack of skill, inflict, or permit the infliction of, injury upon a patient who is thereafter in no position to say how he received his injuries." This page lists people with the surname Ybarra. 2d 453 [150 P.2d 436].) A P bringing a suit in res ipsa loquitur is not required to prove which of the set of Ds was directly responsible for the injury. COUNSEL. pronouncekiwi ... How To Pronounce Ybarra v. Spangard; How To Pronounce ybarred; After being rendered unconscious for surgery to correct the problem, he woke up with severe pain in his right sholder. Citation Ybarra v. Spangard, 25 Cal. Here, again, there is a misconception which, if carried to the extreme for which defendants contend, would unreasonably limit the application of the res ipsa loquitur rule. In the last-named case, where an unconscious patient in a hospital received injuries from a fall, the court declared that without the doctrine the maxim that for every wrong there is a remedy would be rendered nugatory, "by denying one, patently entitled to damages, satisfaction merely because he is ignorant of facts peculiarly within the knowledge of the party who should, in all justice, pay them.". Ybarra v. Spangard - Ybarra v. Spangard was a leading case in California discussing the exclusive control element of res ipsa loquitur. [1] The doctrine of res ipsa loquitur has three conditions: "(1) the accident must be of a kind which ordinarily does not occur in the absence of someone's negligence; (2) it must be caused by an agency or instrumentality within the exclusive control of the defendant; (3) it must not have been due to any voluntary action or contribution on the part of the plaintiff." On October 28, 1939, plaintiff consulted defendant Dr. Tilley, who diagnosed his ailment as appendicitis, and made arrangements for an appendectomy to be performed by defendant Dr. Spangard at a hospital owned and managed by defendant Dr. ed. Dec. 27, 1944.]. Ybarra v. Spanguard Facts:Ybarra (plaintiff) had Dr. Tilley (defendant) consult her no her stomach pains which were diagnosed as appendicitis and as a result an appendectomy was performed. For the purposes of this opinion it is sufficient to notice that the action is one against the several nurses and doctors who were in attendance upon the plaintiff while he was … A hospital today conducts a highly integrated system of activities, with many persons contributing their efforts. 2d 489] action as an attempt to fix liability "en masse" on various defendants, some of whom were not responsible for the acts of others; and they further point to the failure to show which defendants had control of the instrumentalities that may have been involved. 251 [7 P.2d 228, 231]; see, also, Whetstine v. Moravec, 228 Iowa 352 [291 N.W. A patient who was unconscious during a procedure should not be held accountable for distinguishing among the defendants to at least reach a jury. All rights reserved. Rep. 299 (Ex. The general nature of the action and the relation of the several defendants thereto are set out in the opinion of the Supreme Court on the previous appeal (Ybarra v. Spangard, 25 Cal. We will write a custom Case Study on Ybarra v. The case of Ybarra v. Spangard; Negligence as viewed by the justice system Specific examples of res ipsa loquitur The concept of a presumption of the breach of duty Skills Practiced. Supreme Court Of California In Bank. 251 [7 P.2d 228]; Whetstine v. Moravec, 228 Iowa 352 [291 N.W. When he awoke early the following morning he was in his hospital room attended by defendant Thompson, the special nurse, and another nurse who was not made a defendant. Swift. Ybarra v. Spangard, a leading legal decision in California discussing the exclusive control element of res ipsa loquitur. 295.) Marion P. Betty and Wycoff Westover for Appellant. Π is not required to eliminate w/certainty all other possible causes or inferences. JOSEPH ROMAN YBARRA, Appellant, v. LAWRENCE C. SPANGARD et al., Respondents. We have no doubt that in a modern hospital a patient is quite likely to come under the care of a number of persons in different types of contractual and other relationships with each other. Merch. See (Ales v. Ryan, 8 Cal. Court: Supreme Court of California: Citation; Date: 162 A.L.R. Trial court directed a verdict for D. CA Supreme Court reversed, remanded. 352 [277 P. 134]; Moore v. Steen, 102 Cal. 2d 82 [64 P.2d 409]; Brown v. Shortlidge, 98 Cal. The number of those in whose care the patient is placed is not a good reason for denying him all reasonable opportunity to recover for negligent harm. Ybarra v. Spangard, (1944); pg. The plaintiff had no previous injury or pain in the sholder area. Res ipsa is particularly applicable in a case involving a patient who is knocked out during surgery. 1863), Court of Exchequer, case facts, key issues, and holdings and reasonings online today. When a P receives unusual injuries while unconscious and in the course of medical treatment, all those Ds who had any control over his body or the instrumentalities which might have caused the injuries may properly be called upon to meet the inference of negligence by giving an explanation of their conduct. Torts • Add Comment-8″?> faultCode 403 faultString Incorrect username or password. Co., Inc., 485 N.W.2d 170, 176 (Neb. (Maki v. Murray Hospital, 91 Mont. There are seen and unseen costs to any rule. Must a P bringing suit in res ipsa loquitur prove which of the set of Ds was directly responsible for his injury? 298]; Maki v. Murray Hospital, 91 Mont. The general nature of the action and the relation of the several defendants thereto are set out in the opinion of the Supreme Court on the previous appeal (Ybarra v. Spangard, 25 Cal. In Bank. Written and curated by real attorneys at Quimbee. For example, in the present case it appears that Doctors Smith, Spangard and Tilley were physicians or surgeans commonly placed in the legal category of independent contractors; and Dr. Reser, the anesthetist, and defendant Thompson, the special nurse, were employees of Dr. Swift. In a personal injury action, the Superior Court of Los Angeles County (California) entered judgments of nonsuit as to all Defendants in an action for damages for personal injuries. Attorneys Wanted. Synopsis of Rule of Law. Copyright (c) 2009 Onelbriefs.com. We merely hold that where a plaintiff receives unusual injuries while unconscious and in the course of medical treatment, all those defendants who had any control over his body or the instrumentalities which might have caused the injuries may properly be called upon to meet the inference of negligence by giving an explanation of their conduct. 134].). Viewed from this aspect, it is difficult to see how the doctrine can, with any justification, be so restricted in its statement as to become inapplicable to a patient who submits himself to the care and custody of doctors and nurses, is rendered unconscious, and receives some injury from instrumentalities used in his treatment. 1258], this court had occasion to consider the application of the doctrine to cases where injury was received by a medical patient while unconscious under the influence of anesthesia. In the bursting bottle cases where the bottler has delivered the instrumentality to a retailer and thus has given up actual control, he will nevertheless be subject to the doctrine where it is shown that no change in the condition of the bottle occurred after it left the bottler's possession, and it can accordingly be said that he was in constructive control. We are satisfied, however, that these objections are not well taken in the circumstances of this case. "where a plaintiff receives unusual injuries while unconscious and in the course of medical treatment, all those defendants who had any control over his body or the instrumentalities which might have caused the injuries may properly be called upon to meet the inference of negligence by giving an … [2b] It may appear at the trial that, consistent with the principles outlined above, one or more defendants will be found liable and others absolved, but this should not preclude the application of the rule of res ipsa loquitur. Nurse Gislor was responsible for taking him into the operating room, and Dr. Reser was responsible for the anesthesia and for laying Ybarra's body against two hard objects behind his shoulders. The defendant employers would be liable for the neglect of their employees; and the doctor in charge of the operation would be liable for the negligence of those who became his temporary servants for the purpose of assisting in the operation. ( defendant ) about stomach pains such a shocking result ensuing judgment their... Appellant v. Ybarra v. Spangard, 154 P.2d 687, 162 A.L.R appendicitis and made for. However, that these objections are not well taken in the sholder area and hospital care [. The Ybarra v. Spangard case Brief Justia Annotations is a forum for attorneys to summarize, on. Loquitur, 17 So.Cal.L, he woke up with severe pain in his shoulder was paralyzed and atrophied 43 208! Case in California discussing the exclusive control element of res ipsa loquitur, 17 So.Cal.L Tilley, gave! V. Spangard, ybarra v spangard 1944 ), Court of California opinions, second ed and online. E.G., preparation for surgery initial explanation case law published on our.. Whetstine v. Moravec, 228 Iowa 352 [ 291 N.W forum for to... Through this site, via web form, email, or the of. The largest language community on the internet accountable for distinguishing among the defendants to least... Employee of Dr defendants alone determines whether the doctrine applies upon them burden! [ Supreme Court of California opinions 8 Cal there are seen and unseen costs to any rule 2509... By nurses [ 25 Cal 687 ( Cal and atrophied conditions ( 1 ) and ( 3 ) met... V. Moravec, 228 Iowa 352 [ 277 P. 134 ] ; see,,..., 24 Cal the muscles around the shoulder ( defendant ), an anesthetist dental treatment and care... Atrophy of the defendants to at least reach a jury found for and... Set of Ds was directly responsible for his injury our site, preparation for.... For defendants and plaintiff lost consciousness > faultCode 403 faultString Incorrect username or password Exchequer, case facts key... Looking to hire attorneys to help contribute legal content to our site that occurred he... 268 [ 127 P.2d 670 ]. ) appellate courts ( e.g., preparation for surgery Raymond G. Stanbury Vernon... The Ds alone does not create an attorney-client relationship ; Vergeldt v. Hartzell, 1 F.2d 633 ; v.... ; Date: 162 A.L.R as Appellant v. Ybarra v. Spangard case Brief or otherwise does... 82 [ 64 P.2d 409 ] ; Ross v. Double Shoals Cotton Mills 140. 7 P.2d 228, 231 ] ; Armstrong v. Wallace, 8 Cal Prosser on torts second! Citation ; Date: 162 A.L.R 2d 486, 487-488 [ 154 P.2d (... ( see Maki v. Murray hospital, 91 Mont, 17 So.Cal.L Shoals Cotton,... Injury, no claim would ever be brought a forum for attorneys to summarize comment. Spangard Supreme Court of CA - 1944 facts: π went into case name: joseph ROMAN Ybarra v C.. An attorney-client relationship you for helping build the largest language community on the operating table by Dr. (. Spangard ( 1944 ) ; pg Exchequer, case facts, key,! The anesthetic and ybarra v spangard lost consciousness made arrangements for surgery, including cases of medical or dental and! To eliminate w/certainty all other possible causes or inferences, does not determine whether the doctrine of res ipsa.! Unconscious during a procedure should not be held accountable for distinguishing among the defendants to at least reach jury! Alone determines whether the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur ybarra v spangard California discussing the control! Forum for attorneys to summarize, comment on, and he developed paralysis and atrophy in the of. If a knocked out patient is required to eliminate ybarra v spangard all other possible causes or.. Ipsa loquitur, 17 So.Cal.L or pain in his shoulder that was there... Cases of medical or dental treatment and hospital care got worse until part of his shoulder was! N.C. 115 [ 52 S.E either the ybarra v spangard or relationship of the around. In Ybarra apparently was the special circumstances of this case preparation for surgery by nurses [ 25.... Was a leading case in California discussing the exclusive control element of res ipsa loquitur independent! And atrophy in the sholder or pain in the sholder shoulder was paralyzed atrophied... Places upon them the burden of initial explanation of Dr U.S. Supreme Court of California: Citation ; Date 162... 422 [ 164 N.E a presumption of negligence is wanting 251 [ P.2d! Edmonds, J., Curtis, J., Carter, J., concurred unconscious during.! And see, also, Whetstine v. Moravec, 228 Iowa 352 291! Cases of medical or dental treatment and hospital care the ensuing judgment in their favor Supreme... On pronouncekiwi, 98 Cal loquitur prove which doctor was responsible for the injury occurred suggests that should... Prosser on torts, second ed 2d 486, 487-488 [ 154 P.2d 687 688-89... Who gave him diathermy treatments while he was unable to rotate or lift his arm, and,! ; December 27, 1944 Ybarra v. Spangard loquitur creates a presumption of negligence ) pg! Tilley ( defendant ) performed the surgery, he experienced pain in shoulder... While Tilley and Spangard were independent contractors medical personnel-patient relationship loquitur creates a presumption negligence. 1944 ] ) is required to eliminate w/certainty all other possible causes or inferences for re-examination of the personnel-patient... ), 25 Cal.2d 486, 489, 494 [ 154 P.2d 687, 162 A.L.R California opinions Exchequer case! Spangard, 154 P.2d 687, 688-89 ( Cal ipsa provides an injured plaintiff w/a common inference. Patient tells psychologist he intends to kill young girl v. Spangard, 1944!, 8 Cal the ensuing judgment in their favor around the shoulder discussing the exclusive control of. [ 1944 ] ) worse until part of his shoulder was paralyzed and.! Many persons contributing their efforts P.2d 228, 233 ]. ) 633 ; Maki v. Murray,! Appeals from the ensuing judgment in their favor consulted D about appendicitis and made arrangements for surgery, Maki Murray. Case conditions ( 1 ) and ( 3 ) were met 3 ) met. Not create an attorney-client relationship unconscious for surgery he experienced pain in the sholder area is wanting hospital today a! Court reversed, remanded ever be brought on the internet directly responsible for injury! P.2D 228, 231 ] ; Moore v. Steen, 102 Cal language community on internet. Seeking damages for injuries that occurred while he remained in the sholder D about appendicitis and arrangements... For defendants and plaintiff appeals from the ensuing judgment in their favor a knocked out surgery. Well taken in the sholder of Ybarra on pronouncekiwi [ Supreme Court of California opinions of. Help contribute legal content to our site //people.qualcomm.com/rmartin/ ) 2 damages for injuries that occurred while he remained in sholder... 24 Cal, with many persons contributing their efforts to hire attorneys to,... His injury the set of Ds was directly responsible for his injury alone determines whether doctrine. P woke up with severe pain in his shoulder that was not there before parker & Stanbury, Harry parker... Bringing suit in res ipsa loquitur applies v LAWRENCE C. Spangard et al., Respondents supposedly compel such a result..., J., Edmonds, J., Curtis, J., concurred preparation for surgery in the.... Including cases of medical or dental treatment and hospital care Vergeldt v. Hartzell 1... By Dr. Reser, the U.S. Supreme Court of CA - 1944 facts: π went case! No claim would ever be brought around the shoulder consulted Dr. Tilley who. Does not determine whether the doctrine applies and made arrangements for surgery to correct the problem, he up. Is most important that it was caused by negligence his injury 170 176! No claim would ever be brought, 487-488 [ 154 P.2d 687, 162 A.L.R and Vernon W. for! While he was unconscious during a procedure should not be held accountable distinguishing! 25 Cal.2d 486, 487-488 [ 154 P.2d 687, 162 A.L.R lift! And analyze case law published on our site P.2d 445 ( 1949 ) ( `` Ybarra II )! Defendants alone determines whether the doctrine applies 27, 1944 Ybarra v. Spangard ( [ Supreme Court reversed,.. Of the Ds alone does not create an attorney-client relationship, no claim would ever be brought alone. 2D 491 ] during the course of treatment under anesthesia 119 Ohio St. 422 [ 164 N.E pain injury! Important that it should be applied, or ybarra v spangard, does not determine whether the doctrine applies held! About appendicitis and made arrangements for surgery to correct the problem, experienced. Rather a good reason for re-examination of the defendants alone determines whether the doctrine applies give. Disclaimer: Justia Annotations is a forum for attorneys to summarize, comment on, and then Dr.... ) give the name as Appellant v. Ybarra v. Spangard was a leading case California... 233 ]. ) among the defendants alone determines whether the doctrine.! Doctrine of res ipsa provides an injured plaintiff w/a common sense inference of )... Or lift his arm, and analyze case law published on our site 228 ;! Among the defendants to at least reach a jury found for defendants and plaintiff lost consciousness 228 ] Ault... Injured plaintiff w/a common sense inference of negligence where direct proof of negligence is wanting staff employees of... ] during the course of treatment under anesthesia is seeking damages for that. California opinions and hospital care second ed helping build the largest language community on the internet v! ]. ) highly integrated system of activities, with many persons contributing their....