Cowan v. Diaz-Padron

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Cowan v. Diaz-Padron

350 So. 2d 1107, 1977 Fla. App. LEXIS 16821

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedOctober 4, 1977

DocketNo. 76-912

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 350 So. 2d 1107 (Cowan v. Diaz-Padron) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Cowan v. Diaz-Padron, 350 So. 2d 1107, 1977 Fla. App. LEXIS 16821 (Fla. Ct. App. 1977).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The plaintiff [Shelly Cowan] appeals from an adverse summary judgment in a medical malpractice action contending that there are genuine issues of material fact as to the alleged negligent diagnosis and treatment of the plaintiff’s spinal injuries by the defendant [Dr. Menilio Diaz-Padron]. We agree and reverse on the authority of Holl v. Talcott, 191 So.2d 40 (Fla.1966).

There remain genuine issues of material fact in the case including whether the defendant, consistent with the standards of reasonable medical care in the community, promptly administered and properly read the results of a Queckenstedt test given the plaintiff to determine the presence of blockage of cerebral spinal fluid, whether the plaintiff should have been promptly placed in traction after discovery of the injury, and whether a drug called decadron should have been administered to treat the plaintiff’s spinal cord injury so as to prevent the alleged painful and unnecessary spinal fusion eventually administered to the plaintiff. There are also genuine issues relating to whether the defendant promptly ordered a circular hospital bed for the plaintiff so as to prevent the occurrence of alleged painful decubitus ulcers. See Helms v. Sims, 330 So.2d 71 (Fla.3d DCA 1976); Giallanza v. Sands, 316 So.2d 77 (Fla.4th DCA 1975); Lab v. Hall, 200 So.2d 556 (Fla.4th DCA 1967).

The summary judgment entered in favor of the defendant is, accordingly, reversed and the cause remanded to the trial court for further proceedings.

Reversed and remanded.

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

PER CURIAM.

The plaintiff [Shelly Cowan] appeals from an adverse summary judgment in a medical malpractice action contending that there are genuine issues of material fact as to the alleged negligent diagnosis and treatment of the plaintiff’s spinal injuries by the defendant [Dr. Menilio Diaz-Padron]. We agree and reverse on the authority of Holl v. Talcott, 191 So.2d 40 (Fla.1966).

There remain genuine issues of material fact in the case including whether the defendant, consistent with the standards of reasonable medical care in the community, promptly administered and properly read the results of a Queckenstedt test given the plaintiff to determine the presence of blockage of cerebral spinal fluid, whether the plaintiff should have been promptly placed in traction after discovery of the injury, and whether a drug called decadron should have been administered to treat the plaintiff’s spinal cord injury so as to prevent the alleged painful and unnecessary spinal fusion eventually administered to the plaintiff. There are also genuine issues relating to whether the defendant promptly ordered a circular hospital bed for the plaintiff so as to prevent the occurrence of alleged painful decubitus ulcers. See Helms v. Sims, 330 So.2d 71 (Fla.3d DCA 1976); Giallanza v. Sands, 316 So.2d 77 (Fla.4th DCA 1975); Lab v. Hall, 200 So.2d 556 (Fla.4th DCA 1967).

The summary judgment entered in favor of the defendant is, accordingly, reversed and the cause remanded to the trial court for further proceedings.

Reversed and remanded.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

350 So. 2d 1107, 1977 Fla. App. LEXIS 16821, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cowan-v-diaz-padron-fladistctapp-1977.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack