Alarcon v. Alexandria Hospital

Alexandria County Circuit Court

Alarcon v. Alexandria Hospital

31 Va. Cir. 249, 1993 Va. Cir. LEXIS 97

CourtAlexandria County Circuit Court

DecidedJune 30, 1993

DocketCase No. (Law) CL930305

StatusPublished

This text of 31 Va. Cir. 249 (Alarcon v. Alexandria Hospital) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Alexandria County Circuit Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Alarcon v. Alexandria Hospital, 31 Va. Cir. 249, 1993 Va. Cir. LEXIS 97 (Va. Super. Ct. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

By Judge Alfred D. Swersky

Defendants’ motion for leave to file a third-party motion for judgment will be denied.

Plaintiffs action is one for wrongful death, alleging medical malpractice by health care providers following an automobile accident. Defendants seek to join the driver of one of the automobiles as a third-party defendant for purposes of contribution.

The party sought to be joined need not be a joint tortfeasor but only someone whose concurrent negligence may have been a proximate cause of the injury or death. However, under these circumstances, the addition of the third-party defendant changes the nature of plaintiffs claim, renders the case unduly complex for the trier of fact, and does not serve judicial economy. Defendants’ rights to contribution are not prejudiced and can be pursued at any time in an appropriate but separate action.

I have this date signed the order denying Defendants’ motion, and their objections are noted.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

By Judge Alfred D. Swersky

Defendants’ motion for leave to file a third-party motion for judgment will be denied.

Plaintiffs action is one for wrongful death, alleging medical malpractice by health care providers following an automobile accident. Defendants seek to join the driver of one of the automobiles as a third-party defendant for purposes of contribution.

The party sought to be joined need not be a joint tortfeasor but only someone whose concurrent negligence may have been a proximate cause of the injury or death. However, under these circumstances, the addition of the third-party defendant changes the nature of plaintiffs claim, renders the case unduly complex for the trier of fact, and does not serve judicial economy. Defendants’ rights to contribution are not prejudiced and can be pursued at any time in an appropriate but separate action.

I have this date signed the order denying Defendants’ motion, and their objections are noted.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

31 Va. Cir. 249, 1993 Va. Cir. LEXIS 97, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/alarcon-v-alexandria-hospital-vaccalexandria-1993.