Congress did not reach a “conclusion that there was negligence” on the part of any doctor or hospital.

and hospital had been negligent.

In the first place, the last-mentioned doctors do not charge the Casper doctors and hospital with negligence and malpractice or with violating any medical-care and treatment standards.

The authorities are almost unanimous in holding that such institutions are not liable in damages for the negligence of their physicians or nurses in the absence of proof of negligence in their selection.

or the negligence of their attendants.”

It is the settled rule that such a hospital is not liable for the negligence of its physicians and nurses in the treatment of patients.”

The appellant, Harris, claims damages from the hospital and physicians based upon their alleged negligent care, treatment, diagnosis, and examination of the decedent during her hospitalization and two visits to the emergency room.

Malpractice is a form of negligence. Before a physician may be held liable for malpractice, it must be shown that he departed from recognized standards of medical practice.

The testimony of experts is therefore necessary to establish that decedent’s death was caused by the negligence of appellees. *754 The doctors’ depositions in this case state that Mrs.

John’s Hospital is vicariously liable for the pathologists’ negligence because both doctors were ostensible or apparent agents of the hospital.

John’s Hospital Traditionally, a hospital can be held vicariously liable for the negligence of its employees, but not for the negligence of physicians who are independent contractors. See Parker v.

John’s Hospital Appellant contends that, in addition to any potential vicarious liability, the hospital itself owes an independent duty to exercise reasonable care to prevent negligent treatment by its staff physicians.

Undeniably, without negligent treatment by the doctor, a negligent credentialing claim against the hospital could not exist. Lopez v.

privileged physician.”); Schelling v.

Hosp., 156 S.W.3d at 545-46 (“If the physician is not negligent, there is no negligent credentialing claim against the hospital.”

FACTS The patient filed a medical malpractice action on February 13,1995, alleging that the doctor negligently recommended a surgical procedure to deflate a large cyst on the patient’s left kidney, that the doctor performed the surgery

in a negligent manner, and that the doctor failed to obtain an informed consent from the patient when he did not disclose significant risks of the surgery.

The doctor denied being negligent in caring for and treating the patient. On May 1, 1996, during the course of discovery, the patient designated an expert witness.

App.) 26 P. (2d) 506 (affirmed on another ground, 1 Cal. (2d) 447, 35 P. (2d) 536 ), the charge of negligence was the injection of glucose, one physician testifying that the injection of a solution of ten per cent was negligent.

As long as there is room for an honest difference of opinion among competent physicians, a physician who uses his own judgment cannot be convicted of negligence, even though it may after-wards develop that he was mistaken.”

Johnson as well as the other physicians testified that when manipulation should begin depends on the judgment of the attending physician. Hence no negligence is shown in that respect.

Flick’s testimony is the fact that, since appellee was actively participating in the treatment of Gus Vas-sos, and since every doctor has been taught the consequence of failure to treat an intra-abdominal infection, any negligence

that the physician’s negligence caused the injury. * * * ” Harris v.

Wahl’s testimony, taken as a whole, could have allowed a jury to reach the conclusion that appellee was negligent as a treating physician and that negligence was a proximate cause of Gus Vassos’ death.

A separate complaint was filed against each doctor which, although very similar to the other, alleged distinct acts of negligence against each doctor. 7 The trial judge was also aware that this case, like Distad , involved allegations

That being the case, we perceive no reason why physicians, to the exclusion of everyone else, are entitled to a due-care instruction in a negligence case. Cf. Hoem v.

The acts of negligence alleged against the doctors were identical with the exception that McMillan was alleged to have been negligent by “putting Neal Wardell’s neck through a range of motion and in applying vertical pressure to his

Where a physician is negligent in diagnosing a disease, and the resulting delay reduces the plaintiff's chances of survival (even though the chance of survival was below fifty percent before the missed diagnosis), a strong argument

can be made that the physician should be responsible for the value of the chance that the plaintiff lost, so long as the initial act of the physician was itself negligent.

In the court's words, "* * * [to decide otherwise would be a blanket release from liability for doctors and hospitals any time there was less than a 50 percent chance of survival, regardless of how flagrant the negligence." 1 Furrow

We have, however, considered cases which involved claims of negligence against attorneys, engineers, and physicians. See, e.g., Moore v. Lubnau, 855 P.2d 1245 (Wyo.1993) (attorneys); Kemper Architects, P.C. v.

Bell, 778 P.2d 108 (Wyo.1989) (physicians).

When professional negligence is asserted, we generally require the plaintiff to present expert witness testimony which reveals the standard of care applicable to the profession and the defendant’s compliance with or breach of that

Hamilton, then plaintiff’s attorney, learned in July, 1984, about 8 months after the alleged negligent act, that Dr. Wierdsma had gone to California. He knew he was a physician probably practicing in California.

This lawsuit includes a claim that the hospital was negligent in granting the doctor the privilege to practice in that hospital as an obstetrician.

We recognize that if the committee’s activities were admissible, then a party to a negligence action, be it plaintiff, physician or hospital, could rely upon the committee to provide an expert opinion on the ultimate issue of negligence

Thus, where a suture needle had been left in the patient’s body, expert testimony was held to be unnecessary to establish causation between the alleged negligence of the defendant doctor and the pain of which the plaintiff complained

(a) A governmental entity is liable for damages resulting from bodily injury, wrongful death or property damage caused by the negligence of health care providers who are employees of the governmental entity, including contract physicians

Traditionally, a hospital is not liable for the negligence of a physician who is an independent contractor. Adamski v. Tacoma General Hospital, 20 Wash.App. 98 , 579 P.2d 970, 973 (1978).

In this case, however, the physician was an employee of the hospital. Under the doctrine of respondeat superior, an employer is liable for the negligence of an employee who is acting within the scope of his employment. Austin v.

This Court has recognized that, if a physician is the employee of a hospital, the hospital may be held liable for the injuries negligently inflicted by the physician under the doctrine of respondeat superior: “Where a hospital holds

Malpractice is a form of negligence. Before a physician may be held liable for malpractice, it must be shown that he departed from recognized standards of medical practice.

. [¶30] We affirmed entry of the judgment and found the claims against the hospital and supervising doctor “rest on the predicate of [the nurse’s] negligence.” Beavis, 2001 WY 32 , ¶¶ 19–22, 20 P.3d at 515–517.

We found there was no independent claim of negligence made against the supervising doctor because there was no allegation the supervising doctor “should not have prescribed any medicine, that he prescribed the wrong medicine, that

Indeed, we reiterated the only claim against the supervising doctor was that he “failed to train or supervise [the nurse] in administering the injection” and therefore “even assuming [the supervising doctor] was negligent in the manner

That by reason of the failure and neglect of the defendant to fulfill and carry out its. contract as aforesaid with the plaintiff and by reason of the negligence and carelessness, unskilfulness and incompetency of defendant’s physicians

Among other allegations it is alleged in paragraph 5 of the petition that the physician furnished did, in the performance of the operation, “carelessly and negligently, and unnecessarily cut a large hole in the neck of plaintiff’s

of defendant’s physician and surgeon so furnished.

In medical malpractice cases, “expert medical testimony is ordinarily required to establish negligence or lack of reasonable care on the part of a physician or surgeon in his medical diagnosis, his performance of surgical procedures

In order to settle this issue, we must examine the evidence which Oakden relies upon in arguing that she established a prima facie case of negligence.

She directs our attention to the testimony of two physicians who testified about comments that a third physician apparently made to them. Gary T. Baldwin, M.D., an obstetrieian/gynecologist, testified that Gregory M.

On June 30, 1982, appellant filed an action against appellee, other doctors and the Natrona County Hospital, alleging negligence in her medical treatment.