Grossman v. Hawkes Hospital

Ohio Supreme Court

Grossman v. Hawkes Hospital

556 N.E.2d 180, 52 Ohio St. 3d 87, 1990 Ohio LEXIS 258

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedJune 27, 1990

DocketNo. 89-710

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 556 N.E.2d 180 (Grossman v. Hawkes Hospital) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Grossman v. Hawkes Hospital, 556 N.E.2d 180, 52 Ohio St. 3d 87, 1990 Ohio LEXIS 258 (Ohio 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Plaintiff Grossman

[88]*88apparently injured himself in a fall from unknown causes. “It is rudimentary that in order to establish actionable negligence, one must show the existence of a duly, a breach of the duty, and an injury resulting proximately therefrom.” Menifee v. Ohio Welding Products, Inc. (1984), 15 Ohio St. 3d 75, 77, 15 OBR 179, 180, 472 N.E. 2d 707, 710. After considering the entire record, we agree with the trial court. Plaintiffs failed to establish facts from which reasonable minds could conclude that defendant hospital breached any duty to Grossman proximately causing his injuries. Civ. R. 50(A)(4); Annotation, Hospital’s Liability to Patient Injured Going To or Using Bathroom or Toilet Facilities (1971), 36 A.L.R. 3d 1235. See, also, Temple v. Wean United, Inc. (1977), 50 Ohio St. 2d 317, 4 O.O. 3d 466, 364 N.E. 2d 267.

Accordingly, the judgment of the court of appeals is reversed and the judgment of the trial court is reinstated.

Judgment reversed.

Moyer, C.J., Sweeney, Holmes, Douglas, Wright, H. Brown and Resnick, JJ., concur.

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

Per Curiam.

Plaintiff Grossman

[88]*88apparently injured himself in a fall from unknown causes. “It is rudimentary that in order to establish actionable negligence, one must show the existence of a duly, a breach of the duty, and an injury resulting proximately therefrom.” Menifee v. Ohio Welding Products, Inc. (1984), 15 Ohio St. 3d 75, 77, 15 OBR 179, 180, 472 N.E. 2d 707, 710. After considering the entire record, we agree with the trial court. Plaintiffs failed to establish facts from which reasonable minds could conclude that defendant hospital breached any duty to Grossman proximately causing his injuries. Civ. R. 50(A)(4); Annotation, Hospital’s Liability to Patient Injured Going To or Using Bathroom or Toilet Facilities (1971), 36 A.L.R. 3d 1235. See, also, Temple v. Wean United, Inc. (1977), 50 Ohio St. 2d 317, 4 O.O. 3d 466, 364 N.E. 2d 267.

Accordingly, the judgment of the court of appeals is reversed and the judgment of the trial court is reinstated.

Judgment reversed.

Moyer, C.J., Sweeney, Holmes, Douglas, Wright, H. Brown and Resnick, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

556 N.E.2d 180, 52 Ohio St. 3d 87, 1990 Ohio LEXIS 258, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/grossman-v-hawkes-hospital-ohio-1990.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack