The plaintiff’s second amended complaint “added additional claims that the [h]ospital was directly negligent in hiring and granting privileges to the [doctors] and conspired with [the doctors] . . . .” Id. at *9 .

Colo. 1983), the plaintiffs filed a complaint alleging that three doctors’ negligence caused the death of the decedent. Id. at 1335-36 .

The complaint also alleged that the hospital was vicariously liable for the doctors’ negligence. Id. at 1336, 1338 .

A hospital may be liable for the negligence of nominally independent physicians under certain circumstances not alleged to be present here, i.e., “where the patient engages the services of the hospital without regard to the identity

A hospital is generally not liable for the negligence of independent doctors treating patients on its premises, but it “may be liable for its own negligence and the negligence of its employees.” Clark v. St.

Dominic had no duty to supervise Newton’s physician and that the Newtons have shown no negligence by St.

Kelly alleged that UMMC’s physicians failed to properly treat the injury during his August 14 visit.

Kelly 2 asserted that the infection resulted from medical negligence in the course of his care at UMMC and that the infection necessitated the amputation of his two toes. ¶6. UMMC, through Dr.

“[A]bsent error so obvious that a layman could easily determine fault, expert testimony is generally required to survive summary judgment and establish the negligence of a physician.”2 Sheffield v.

For a plaintiff to properly establish the negligence of a physician, an expert witness must “articulate a specific, objectively-determined standard of care.” Est. of Northrop v.

“Absent expert medical testimony that articulates the duty of care a physician owes to a particular patient under the circumstances and identifies the particular point that the physician breached that duty and caused injury to the

plaintiff, a plaintiff’s claim for negligence must fail.”

plaintiff first recognized the adverse effects from [a prescribed medication] until [the plaintiff] checked himself into the hospital . . . , were enough to satisfy the statutory requirement of discovery of the alleged medical negligence

on the part of [the doctor].”

The letters did not communicate that the doctor was negligent in his diagnosis or in his treatment but simply instructed the patients to receive a reevaluation of their diagnosis with another doctor for good measure.

What’s missing and what’s needed is a medical expert opinion that what this doctor did was not only negligent but that that proximately caused the injuries wherein between those two points you’ve got Dr.

In support of his qualifications to opine that the doctor was negligent in ordering repeated contrast-enhanced CT scans despite the patient’s signs of renal failure, the nephrologist asserted, “I am very familiar with the standards

Swirsky and his opinions that the negligence of the Clinic’s physician, Dr. Folk, caused or contributed to Williams’s death. ¶26.

For its first issue on appeal, Singing River asserts the trial court “inappropriately found [the hospital was] vicariously liable despite its finding that Singing River’s employees 10 were not negligent.”

Essentially, the hospital asks to be relieved of liability because it claims the trial court found two of its doctors met the standard of care. ¶34. This argument fails for two reasons.

At trial, the daughter argued the nurse was negligent in her failure to warn a doctor of the patient’s blood loss, which caused a fatal delay. Id. at (¶6).

Rather, according to previous case authority,“[a] nonprofit corporation, MACM is a limited pool of Mississippi physicians who are self-insured for protection against medical negligence suits.” Wells v.

But that does not mean that every consent-based claim against a physician is necessarily a lack-of-informed-consent claim and thus a medical-negligence claim requiring expert testimony.

We can envision a case in which a doctor rendered medical or surgical treatment allegedly without any consent and without implicating any medical judgment for which expert testimony would be needed. ¶37.

Korangy caused Greer to be treated for the wrong condition—an autoimmune disorder—for twelve days before another physician recognized Dr. Korangy’s mistake. All parties agreed that Dr. Korangy was negligent, and Dr.

Jessica Moore filed this medical malpractice lawsuit on behalf of her daughter, Jasmine, alleging that the defendants—two hospitals in Meridian, a home health agency, and individual doctors and nurses employed by them—negligently

Moore’s complaint alleged that UMMC and its physicians committed malpractice while Jasmine was under their care on February 26-29, 2016, by negligently failing to diagnose a shunt malfunction and ultimately discharging Jasmine “with

The hospital moved for summary judgment, arguing that the Smiths failed to provide expert testimony that the nursing staff was negligent. Id. at 994 (¶7). In response, the Smiths submitted affidavits from two doctors, Dr.

The circuit court’s judgment dismissing Foote’s claim against the Hospital was justified because Foote’s expert medical doctor failed to provide testimony that Graham’s negligence proximately caused Foote’s injury.

Our Supreme Court has ruled that “[i]n cases alleging that death was caused by the negligence of a health care provider, proximate cause must be established by a medical doctor.” Mariner Health Care Inc. v.

App. 2011): a physician brought claims against the university for claimed breach of contract, detrimental reliance, negligent misrepresentation, negligent and intentional infliction of emotional distress, and slander that stemmed from

“Absent expert medical testimony that articulates the duty of care a physician owes to a particular patient under the circumstances and identifies the particular point that the physician breached that duty and caused injury to the

plaintiff, a plaintiff’s claim for negligence must fail.”