Fred v. Wilson v. Monroe County, Tennessee
2013 Tenn. App. LEXIS 53
| Tenn. Ct. App. | 2013Background
- Wilson v. Monroe County; bench trial in Tennessee; ambulance ride allegedly caused Mrs. Wilson’s left foot injury and subsequent leg amputation.
- Mrs. Wilson had pre-existing conditions (diabetes, obesity, COPD, heart disease, stroke) and limited mobility prior to the incident.
- Injury occurred during ambulance transport after a 911 call; evidence on whether foot injury occurred before or during transport was disputed.
- Trial court found the injury occurred inside the ambulance during a left turn and awarded damages ($150,000 for pain and suffering, $50,000 loss of consortium, $32,091.84 medical expenses).
- Monroe County dismissed claims against Sweetwater; Monroe County appeals; damages challenged as inadequate; court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Directed verdict vs involuntary dismissal standard | Wilson argues bench trial uses involuntary dismissal standard. | Monroe County argues proper standard allows dismissal if no right to relief. | Trial court properly denied dismissal; evidence supports liability. |
| Whether case is ordinary negligence or medical malpractice | Plaintiff contends ordinary negligence applies; expert needed if malpractice. | County argues malpractice standard may apply; expert testimony required. | Ambulance negligence is ordinary negligence; no expert needed; if malpractice, evidence would still show duty/breach. |
| Causation testimony by Dr. Cassada | Causation supported by expert testimony linking foot wound to amputation. | Defendant contends causation speculative and improperly admitted. | Dr. Cassada's causation testimony admissible and sufficient by preponderance. |
| Reasonableness and necessity of medical expenses | Medical bills linked to the injury; statutory presumption used; costs recoverable if reasonable. | Defendant argues bills not proven reasonable/necessary. | UT Hospital bills ($32,091.84) reasonable and necessary; presumption preserved. |
| Good Samaritan immunity scope | Immunity applies to emergency care en route; injury occurred during transport; immunity not complete. | Monroe County seeks broader immunity. | Good Samaritan Law does not bar liability for injuries during ambulance transport; liability imposed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Estate of French v. Stratford House, 333 S.W.3d 546 (Tenn. 2011) (delicate distinction between ordinary negligence and medical malpractice)
- Jones v. Garrett, 92 S.W.3d 835 (Tenn. 2002) (great weight to trial court on credibility)
- Kilpatrick v. Bryant, 868 S.W.2d 594 (Tenn. 1993) (preponderance standard for causation in medical context)
- Peete v. Shelby County Health Care Corp., 938 S.W.2d 693 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1996) (ordinary negligence vs. medical malpractice examples)
- Borner v. Autry, 284 S.W.3d 216 (Tenn. 2009) (reasonableness of medical expenses; causal link required)
- Newsom v. Markus, 588 S.W.2d 883 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1979) (causation and necessity of medical charges)