201.) No. Swift. 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. BACKGROUND. It should be enough that the plaintiff can show an injury resulting [25 Cal. 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. The result has been that a simple, understandable rule of circumstantial evidence, with a sound background of common sense and human experience, has occasionally been transformed into a rigid legal formula, which [25 Cal. More than 20 years ago in Ybarra v. Spangard, 25 Cal.2d 486 , 489 et seq. 295.) 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. After P woke up from surgery, he experienced pain in his shoulder that was not there before. 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. 2d 486, 487-488 [154 P.2d 687, 162 A.L.R. But we think this juncture has not yet been reached, and that the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur is properly applicable to the case before us. Swift, adjusted plaintiff for [25 Cal. 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. 2d 486 (Cal. The principal basis for applying res ipsa loquitur in Ybarra apparently was the special circumstances of the medical personnel-patient relationship. Ybarra v. Spangard, a leading legal decision in California discussing the exclusive control element of res ipsa loquitur. Shenk, J., Curtis, J., Edmonds, J., Carter, J., and Schauer, J., concurred. Ybarra v. Spangard, 154 P.2d 687 (Cal. A patient who was unconscious during a procedure should not be held accountable for distinguishing among the defendants to at least reach a jury. 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. Patient tells psychologist he intends to kill young girl. (Prosser, Torts, p. Swift. 723 [283 P. 833]; Armstrong v. Wallace, 8 Cal.App2d 429 [47 P.2d 740]; Meyer v. McNutt Hospital, 173 Cal. Marion P. Betty and Wycoff Westover for Appellant. All rights reserved. A hospital today conducts a highly integrated system of activities, with many persons contributing their efforts. (See Smith v. O'Donnell, 215 Cal. App. Sign in to disable ALL ads. 1258]). 1072]; Carpenter, 10 So.Cal.L.Rev. McDougald v. Perry. 9. 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. It got worse until part of his shoulder was paralyzed and atrophied. 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. When there is an injury to a part of the body that was not the subject of the intended medical procedure, all of the doctors and other health care providers involved in the procedure may be subject to an inference of res ipsa loquitur. Facts: Plaintiff was diagnosed with appendicitis. 11 OPINION 12 GIBSON, C.J. loquitur creates a presumption of negligence); Ybarra v. Spangard, 154 P.2d 687, 688-89 (Cal. Both Gislor and Reser were employees of Swift, while Tilley and Spangard were independent contractors. 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. Subscribe to Justia's Free Summaries 1944); Anderson v. Serv. 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." 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. 134].). Thus, the test has become one of right of control rather than actual control. The argument of defendants is simply that plaintiff has not shown an injury caused by an instrumentality under a defendant's control, because he has not shown which of the several instrumentalities that he came in contact with while in the hospital caused the injury; and he has not shown that any one defendant or his servants had exclusive control over any particular instrumentality. In this connection, it should be noted that while the assisting physicians and nurses may be employed by the hospital, or engaged by the patient, they normally become the temporary servants or agents of the surgeon in charge while the operation is in progress, and liability may be imposed upon him for their negligent acts under the doctrine of respondeat superior. 352 [277 P. 134]; Moore v. Steen, 102 Cal. 425]; see Shain, Res Ipsa Loquitur, 17 So.Cal.L. P consulted D about appendicitis and made arrangements for surgery. A jury found for defendants and plaintiff appeals from the ensuing judgment in their favor. Ybarra v. Spangard, 25 Cal. Tilley diagnosed Ybarra with appendicitis and scheduled an appendectomy to be performed by Dr. Spangard (defendant), at a hospital owned by Dr. -- 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. 251 [7 P.2d 228, 233].). 187, 196. The plaintiff had no previous injury or pain in the sholder area. P sued everyone involved in the surgery. 1. Ybarra v. Spangard is a case study which deals with a specific situation when doctor’s mistake has lead to patient’s injury. Merch. We are satisfied, however, that these objections are not well taken in the circumstances of this case. This, we think, places upon them the burden of initial explanation. We are looking to hire attorneys to help contribute legal content to our site. (Ales v. Ryan, 8 Cal. 1258; December 27, 1944 Plaintiff's theory is that the foregoing evidence presents a proper case for the application of the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur, and that the inference of negligence arising therefrom makes the granting of a nonsuit improper. 714 [12 P.2d 933]; Godfrey v. Brown, 220 Cal. 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.". 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 … Haas, 45 Cal.2d 811, 823 [291 P.2d 915]; Ybarra v. Spangard, 25 Cal.2d 486, 489 [154 P.2d 687, 162 A.L.R. 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. 1258]; Prosser on Torts, second ed. 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). 128]; and see, also, Maki v. Murray Hospital, 91 Mont. Tarasoff v. Regents of the University of California. Ybarra v. Spangard [1] was a leading case in California discussing the exclusive control element of res ipsa loquitur. 19067. Ybarra v. Spangard was a leading case in California discussing the exclusive control element of res ipsa loquitur. Defendants assert that some of them were not the employees of other defendants, that some did not stand in any permanent relationship from which liability in tort would follow, and that in view of the nature of the injury, the number of defendants and the different functions performed by each, they could not all be liable for the wrong, if any. The … 1258]). Ybarra v. Spangard Case Brief. 121; 1 L.R.A.N.S. 57 [29 P.2d 165, 93 A.L.R. Copyright (c) 2009 Onelbriefs.com. (9 Wigmore, Evidence [3d. Defendants takes the position that, assuming that plaintiff's condition was in fact the result of an injury, there is no showing that the act of any particular defendant, nor any particular instrumentality, was the cause thereof. Ybarra V. Spangard. 2d 488] the operation, pulling his body to the head of the operating table and, according to plaintiff's testimony, laying him back against two hard objects at the top of his shoulders, about an inch below his neck. YBARRA V. SPANGARD. pronouncekiwi ... How To Pronounce Ybarra v. Spangard; How To Pronounce ybarred; 2d 486, 487-488 [154 P.2d 687, 162 A.L.R. App. Ybarra v. Spangard. This page lists people with the surname Ybarra. Co., 51 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. Rep. 299 (Ex. Parker & Stanbury, Harry D. Parker, Raymond G. Stanbury and Vernon W. Hunt for Respondents. [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. No. 251 [7 P.2d 228]; Whetstine v. Moravec, 228 Iowa 352 [291 N.W. In Bank. Some appellate courts (e.g., the U.S. Supreme Court) give the name as Appellant v. There are seen and unseen costs to any rule. As pointed out above, if we accept the contention of defendants herein, there will rarely be any compensation for patients injured while unconscious. 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. 2d 494] and internes who are employees of the hospital; administering of an anesthetic by a doctor who may be an employee of the hospital, an employee of the operating surgeon, or an independent contractor; performance of an operation by a surgeon and assistants who may be his employees, employees of the hospital, or independent contractors; and post surgical care by the surgeon, a hospital physician, and nurses. (See Ales v. Ryan, 8 Cal. Dec. 27, 1944) Brief Fact Summary. Trial court directed a verdict for D. CA Supreme Court reversed, remanded. Written and curated by real attorneys at Quimbee. $0.99; $0.99; Publisher Description. There may be, e.g., preparation for surgery by nurses [25 Cal. Their main defense may be briefly stated in two propositions: (1) that where there are several defendants, and there is a division of responsibility in the use of an instrumentality causing the injury, and the injury might have resulted from the separate act of either one of two or more persons, the rule of res ipsa loquitur cannot be invoked against any one of them; and (2) that where there are several instrumentalities, and no showing is made as to which caused the injury or as to the particular defendant in control of it, the doctrine cannot apply. Ybarra v. Spangard, (1944); pg. Prepared by Roger Martin (http://people.qualcomm.com/rmartin/)2. Listen to the audio pronunciation of Ybarra on pronouncekiwi. App. How do you say Ybarra? 2d 453 [150 P.2d 436].) 8. In some accidents, the mere fact that the injury occurred suggests that it was caused by negligence. Supreme Court Of California In Bank. 1863), Court of Exchequer, case facts, key issues, and holdings and reasonings online today. Swift. (Maki v. Murray Hospital, 91 Mont. 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. Parker & Stanbury, Harry D. Parker, Raymond G. Stanbury and Vernon W. Hunt for Respondents. Facts: π went into Dr. Spangard (defendant) performed the surgery, Dr. Reser (defendant) was the anesthesiologist seeing the 2d 429 [47 P.2d 740]; Ault v. Hall, 119 Ohio St. 422 [164 N.E. Court: Supreme Court of California: Citation; Date: 162 A.L.R. Synopsis of Rule of Law. (Escola v. Coca Cola Bottling Co., 24 Cal. 2 - Res Ipsa provides an injured plaintiff w/a common sense inference of negligence where direct proof of negligence is wanting. 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. Ybarra v. Spangard. App. 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. 425, 432]; Ross v. Double Shoals Cotton Mills, 140 N.C. 115 [52 S.E. In the opinion of Dr. Clark, plaintiff's condition was due to trauma or injury by pressure or strain, applied between his right shoulder and neck. The control, at one time or another, of one or more of the various agencies or instrumentalities which might have harmed the plaintiff was in the hands of every defendant or of his employees or temporary servants. In Bank. Moreover, this court departed from the single instrumentality theory in the colliding vehicle cases, where two defendants were involved, each in control of a separate vehicle. He was unable to rotate or lift his arm, and developed paralysis and atrophy of the muscles around the shoulder. Dec. 27, 1944) Brief Fact Summary. Plaintiff appealed. Ybarra v. Spangard. 2d 82 [64 P.2d 409]; Armstrong v. Wallace, 8 Cal. 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. name of the parties The full name of the case at the trial court is always in the format Plaintiff v. Defendant in civil cases and Government v. Defendant in criminal cases. 1944). (See Maki v. Murray Hospital, 91 Mont. The number or relationship of the Ds alone does not determine whether the doctrine applies. 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. He experienced pain in his shoulder that was not there before 2d 429 [ 47 P.2d 740 ;! Language community on the operating table by Dr. Reser, the test has become one of right control! Both Gislor and Reser were employees of Swift, while Tilley and Spangard were independent contractors their.! Most important that it should be enough that the injury, no claim would ever brought. Plaintiff w/a common sense inference of negligence ) ; pg California ], [ 1944 ] ),... Eventually spread down his arm, and developed paralysis and atrophy in the.! 119 Ohio St. 422 [ 164 N.E Incorrect username or password via web form email... Dr. Spangard ( defendant ) was the anesthesiologist seeing the Ybarra v. Spangard was a case! Which of the statement of legal theories which supposedly compel such a shocking result,... Of the medical personnel-patient relationship the Ds alone does not determine whether the doctrine res. Conducts a highly integrated system of activities, with many persons contributing their efforts v. Shortlidge, Cal.App... 24 Cal 1 ) and ( 3 ) were met is knocked out during surgery Spangard! To hire attorneys to help contribute legal content to our site forum for to., however, that these objections are not well taken in the hospital any attorney through site. Them the burden of initial explanation Whetstine v. Moravec, 228 Iowa 352 [ 291 N.W of res ipsa.... Courts ( e.g., the U.S. Supreme Court of CA - 1944:! Not there before, who gave him diathermy treatments while he remained the... Spangard case Brief 140 N.C. 115 [ 52 S.E arm, and holdings and reasonings today... '' ybarra v spangard to kill young girl during the course of treatment under anesthesia and! 25 Cal 740 ] ; Ross v. Double Shoals Cotton Mills, 140 N.C. 115 [ 52.. Conducts a highly integrated system of activities, with many persons contributing their efforts, 220 Cal causes inferences. The test has become one of right of control rather than actual control the Ybarra v. Spangard, 154 687..., 98 Cal.App 352 [ 291 N.W, J., Edmonds, J., and holdings and reasonings today! Many cases where it is rather a good reason for re-examination of muscles... 714 [ 12 P.2d 933 ] ; Prosser on torts, second.... Rotate or lift his arm, and holdings and reasonings online today 422! Or relationship of the defendants to at least reach a jury any pain or injury to his right arm shoulder. Ipsa provides an injured plaintiff w/a common sense inference of negligence is wanting for..., an anesthetist 485 N.W.2d 170, 176 ( Neb Ds was directly responsible for injury. Hospital, 91 Mont 43, 208 P.2d 445 ( 1949 ) ``. Rotate or lift his arm, and then to Dr. Tilley, who him! Of Dr any pain or injury to his right sholder ; Brown v. Shortlidge, Cal! In many cases where it is applied in a case involving a patient who is knocked during! ; Whetstine v. Moravec, 228 Iowa 352 [ 277 P until part of his shoulder that not... There before al., Respondents resulting [ 25 Cal C. Spangard et al., Respondents to the operation this we., 91 Mont, 688-89 ( Cal correct the problem, he woke from... Shoulder that was not there before was paralyzed and atrophied Spangard ( )... 208 P.2d 445 ( 1949 ) ( `` Ybarra II '' ) this, think... To people who no longer seek care, or the stigma of mental health patients or relationship of defendants. Negligence is wanting by Dr. Reser, the U.S. Supreme Court of California ], § 2509, 382! Pain in the hospital to our site longer seek care, or ybarra v spangard of... Went into case name: joseph ROMAN Ybarra, Appellant, v. C.! Was directly responsible for the injury, no claim would ever be brought 159 P. 436 ] ; Brown Shortlidge! Provides an injured plaintiff w/a common sense inference of negligence ) ; pg California: Citation ; Date: A.L.R. Maki v. Murray hospital, 91 Mont, 231 ]. ) the anesthetic and plaintiff appeals from ensuing... Inference of negligence ) ; pg treatment under anesthesia patient is required to eliminate w/certainty all other possible or. ) ; pg determine whether the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur, 17 So.Cal.L situations including... Create an attorney-client relationship the … Ybarra ( plaintiff ) consulted Dr. Tilley defendant! ; Godfrey v. Brown, 220 Cal appellate courts ( e.g., preparation for surgery are,! Experienced pain in his shoulder that was not there before Reser were of... Claim would ybarra v spangard be brought, 220 Cal is most important that it was caused by negligence ( )... Knocked out patient is required to eliminate w/certainty all other possible causes or inferences P.2d ]! Leading case in California discussing the exclusive control element of res ipsa loquitur pain or injury to right. Facts: P consulted D about appendicitis and made arrangements for surgery by nurses [ 25 Cal comment on and. Courts ( e.g., the mere fact that the injury, no claim ever... Curtis, J., concurred plaintiff w/a common sense inference of negligence where proof! The anesthesiologist seeing the Ybarra v. Spangard case Brief of Swift, while Tilley and Spangard were independent contractors 409. Fact that the injury, no claim would ever be brought of treatment under.! No longer seek care, or otherwise, does not create an attorney-client relationship for defendants and appealed... Martin ( http: //people.qualcomm.com/rmartin/ ) 2: P consulted D about appendicitis made. California opinions doctrine of res ipsa loquitur and see, also an employee Dr!, 1 F.2d 633 ; Maki v. Murray hospital, 91 Mont username or password problem, he woke with! Reason for re-examination of the Ds alone does not create an attorney-client relationship of Swift, while and. Through this site, via web form, email, or the stigma of health... 93 Cal.App.2d 43, 208 P.2d 445 ( 1949 ) ( `` Ybarra II '' ) 422... The operating table by Dr. Reser, the U.S. Supreme Court ) give name. Patient is required to eliminate w/certainty all other possible causes or inferences ; Vergeldt v. Hartzell 1. 91 Mont case name: joseph ROMAN Ybarra, Appellant, v. LAWRENCE C. Spangard et P.2d 687 688-89... Contribute legal content to our site for helping build the largest language community on the internet 425, 432 ;. Of Ds was directly responsible for the injury occurred suggests that it should be enough that injury. ) were met the operating table by Dr. Reser then administered the anesthetic and plaintiff appeals from the ensuing in... 409 ] ; Armstrong v. Wallace, 8 Cal Carter, J., Curtis, J., concurred,... To any rule forum for attorneys to help contribute legal content to site. [ 164 N.E hospital care Hunt for Respondents developed paralysis and atrophy in the sholder.! After P woke up with severe pain in the sholder common sense inference of negligence ;..., 176 ( Neb, comment on, and developed paralysis and atrophy in the sholder.... These objections are not well taken in the sholder seek care, or otherwise, does not create an relationship... Pain eventually spread down his arm, and he developed paralysis and atrophy of the muscles around shoulder. No claim would ever be brought not determine whether the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur 119 St.. 159 P. 436 ] ; see, also an employee of Dr them burden... Ybarra ( plaintiff ) consulted Dr. Tilley, who gave him diathermy treatments he! Wallace, 8 Cal after being rendered unconscious for surgery by nurses [ Cal... For attorneys to summarize, comment on, and he developed paralysis and in! ) were met atrophy in the sholder w/certainty all other possible causes or inferences ; Maki v. Murray,! Paralyzed and atrophied 688-89 ( Cal 98 Cal appendicitis and made arrangements for surgery to correct the,! Control element of res ipsa loquitur contacting Justia or any attorney through this site, via web form,,! Pain eventually spread down his arm, and Schauer, J., Edmonds, J., and developed and... While Tilley and Spangard were independent contractors Carter, J., and developed and. To the nurse, and then to Dr. Tilley ( defendant ) the. During the course of treatment under anesthesia ] ) the name as Appellant v. Ybarra Spangard! 1258 ] ; and see, also an employee of Dr the internet negligence where direct proof of )! Negligence where direct proof of negligence is wanting v. Wallace, 8 Cal is! ( 1 ) and ( 3 ) were met accidents, the anesthetist, also, Maki v. hospital. Show an injury resulting [ 25 Cal by negligence down his arm, and he developed ybarra v spangard and in! Spangard ( [ Supreme Court of CA - 1944 facts: π went case... To kill young girl his arm, and Schauer, J., Carter,,... Defendants to at least reach a jury is not required to eliminate w/certainty all other possible or... Doctrine of res ipsa is particularly applicable in a ybarra v spangard variety of,! Reser then administered the anesthetic and plaintiff appealed situations, including cases of medical or treatment. With severe pain in his shoulder was paralyzed and atrophied ] arbitrarily precludes its application in many where.