Rebstock v. Hospital Service Dist. No. 1
This text of 800 So. 2d 435 (Rebstock v. Hospital Service Dist. No. 1) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Louisiana Court of Appeal primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Todd REBSTOCK, et ux
v.
HOSPITAL SERVICE DISTRICT NO. 1, et al.
Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Fifth Circuit.
*436 Kimberly A. Theriot, Jerald P. Block, Matthew F. Block, Law Offices of Jerald P. Block, Thibodaux, LA, Attorneys for Plaintiffs/Appellees.
Jacqueline G. Griffith, Charles J. Fulda IV, Griffith, Battard & Johnson, New Orleans, LA, Attorneys for Defendant/Appellant, the Louisiana Patients' Compensation Fund.
Panel composed of Judges SOL GOTHARD, THOMAS F. DALEY, and CLARENCE E. McMANUS.
THOMAS F. DALEY, Judge.
This is an appeal by the Louisiana Patients' Compensation Fund from a jury verdict in favor of the plaintiffs.
FACTS
Twenty-eight-year-old Lisa Rebstock was involved in a serious automobile accident on April 13, 1993. At the time of the accident she was approximately 33 weeks pregnant. After being extricated from her car, she was transported by ambulance to St. Charles Parish Hospital, a hospital which did not have obstetrical services. Upon arrival to the hospital she was examined and treated by Dr. Helen Badie. Mrs. Rebstock remained at St. Charles Hospital for several hours during which time laboratory tests and x-rays were performed. The exact length of Mrs. Rebstock's stay at St. Charles Hospital was disputed by the parties. She was transferred to St. Ann Hospital in Raceland under the care of her obstetrician, Dr. Charles Faucheaux. An emergency Caesarean section was performed shortly after Mrs. Rebstock's arrival at St. Ann. During the procedure, it was discovered that Mrs. Rebstock had a condition known as abrupto placentae in which the placenta separates from the uterine wall causing a decrease in oxygen to the fetus. It was also discovered that Mrs. Rebstock had a ruptured uterus. The infant, Jake Rebstock, was lifeless at birth, but was resuscitated. He was transferred to Ochsner Hospital where he died two days later.
Mr. and Mrs. Rebstock filed a lawsuit for the wrongful death of their child against St. Charles Hospital and Dr. Badie alleging the defendants were negligent in their failure to properly diagnose Mrs. Rebstock's condition and failure to timely transfer Mrs. Rebstock to St. Ann Hospital. Following a four-day trial, the jury found in favor of the plaintiffs, awarding total damages of $613,810.00. After trial, the Louisiana Patients' Compensation Fund (the Fund) intervened in the suit stating that the defendants were both qualified health care providers under the Louisiana Medical Malpractice Act and as such the Fund is liable for judgments in excess of $100,000.00. Dr. Badie and the *437 hospital each paid the plaintiffs $100,000.00 plus interest, and received satisfaction of judgment and have not appealed. The Fund has appealed claiming the trial court erred in finding the defendants' breached the standard of care and in finding the breach caused the plaintiffs' damages. The Fund also argues the jury awards are an abuse of discretion.
DISCUSSION
In its first Assignment of Error, the Fund argues the facts and evidence show that Jake Rebstock died "as a result of a catastrophic event that occurred moments before Dr. Faucheaux saw Mrs. Rebstock at 4:50 p.m." The Fund contends there was no evidence presented that the care and treatment provided by Dr. Badie and St. Charles Hospital fell below the standard of care. While the Fund acknowledges that the tendering of $100,000.00 by each of the healthcare providers established liability, the Fund goes on to argue that the plaintiffs have the burden of proving the malpractice caused damages in excess of $100,000.00.
In Graham v. Willis-Knighton Medical Center, 97-188, p. 15 (La.9/9/97), 699 So.2d 365, 372, the Supreme Court explained the extent of plaintiff's burden of proving causation after an admission of liability is triggered by a $100,000.00 settlement. The court stated:
[T]he legislative intent of "liability" in Section 1299.44C(5) was that the payment of $100,000 in settlement establishes proof of liability for the malpractice and for damages of at least $100,000 resulting from the malpractice, which is a very significant benefit to the medical malpractice victim. However, at the trial against the Fund, the plaintiff has the burden of proving that the admitted malpractice caused damages in excess of $100,000.
Id. at 372.
On appeal the court may not set aside the factual findings made by the trier of fact in the absence of manifest error. Ambrose v. New Orleans Police Department Ambulance Service, 93-3099, 93-3110, 93-3112 (La.7/5/94), 639 So.2d 216. The manifest error rule applies in appeals of medical malpractice actions. Martin, v. East Jefferson Gen. Hosp., 582 So.2d 1272 (La.1991). Causation in medical malpractice cases is subject to the manifest error standard of review. Id. at 1274.
The crux of the Fund's argument is that the defendants have admitted liability for the failure to timely transfer Mrs. Rebstock, but the plaintiffs failed to prove that the failure to timely transfer Mrs. Rebstock caused the death of the infant. The Fund contends there was a catastrophic event that occurred just prior to the delivery of the infant which caused the death. We disagree.
Dr. Gary Harris was accepted by the court as an expert in the field of emergency medicine. Dr. Harris testified that given the fact that Mrs. Rebstock was in a very serious accident and was 33 weeks pregnant her uterus and fetus were the "main things at risk" for injury as they are the first things to hit the steering wheel. He explained that the uterus is a stretchable, pliable muscle while the placenta is stiff and not pliable. When these areas are struck by something outside the mother's body, the placenta separates from the uterine wall. This results in decreased blood flow and decreased oxygen to the fetus. Dr. Harris explained that upon admission to St. Charles Hospital the fetal heart rate was recorded as 160s. The heart rate was recorded as 160s one other time before Mrs. Rebstock was transferred. Dr. Harris testified that a fetal heart rate in the 160s is the very upper limit of normal and was an indication that *438 the fetus was in distress. He explained that there was decreased oxygen being delivered to the fetus, so the fetus responded by increasing its heart rate. Dr. Harris further testified that the fact that the medical records indicate that Mrs. Rebstock complained of abdominal pain at St. Charles Hospital was a "red flag" that something was "going on in her belly." He further testified that there was no indication in the medical records that Dr. Badie even considered that Mrs. Rebstock had a placental abruption.
Dr. Harris testified that when a pregnant patient presents to an emergency room in a hospital without obstetrical capabilities, the standard of care in emergency medicine requires that the patient be transferred. He explained that Dr. Badie and the personnel at St. Charles Hospital should have been able to fully evaluate Mrs. Rebstock in 20 minutes, then transfer her. He criticized the fact that the medical records indicated that the blood was not drawn for laboratory tests until an hour and twenty minutes after Mrs. Rebstock's arrival. He explained that the results of Mrs. Rebstock's blood tests indicated that there was ongoing bleeding in her body. Dr. Harris testified that even if we were to accept Dr. Badie's testimony that it took one and a half hours to complete the evaluation of Mrs.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
800 So. 2d 435, 1 La.App. 5 Cir. 659, 2001 La. App. LEXIS 2762, 2001 WL 1505178, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rebstock-v-hospital-service-dist-no-1-lactapp-2001.