2012 Ohio 685
Ohio2012Background
- Estate sued McDaniel and Comprehensive for medical negligence in death of Charles Mullins; May 2007 jury awarded $420,000 against defendants.
- Appellate court Mullins v. Comprehensive Pediatric & Adult Medicine remanded some issues for new trial but not clearly limiting scope.
- Appellate mandate issued March 20, 2009 declaring remand for further proceedings; language did not expressly limit retrial to contributory-negligence issue.
- On remand, Judge Curran ordered retrial of negligence and contributory-negligence issues together, aligning with his view of the appellate decision.
- Lisa Mullins sought writs of prohibition and mandamus to confine retrial to contributory negligence; trial court proceeded with full negligence retrial.
- Court of Appeals granted prohibition in 2011; issue is whether Curran patently and unambiguously disregarded mandate; majority reverses prohibition.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the retrial of negligence violated the appellate mandate | Mullins argues retrial exceeded the scope limited by Mullins decision | McDaniel/Comprehensive rely on mandate not expressly limiting retrial | No patently unambiguous disregard; retrial permissible |
| Whether extraordinary relief was appropriate given a remedy on appeal | Relief appropriate to enforce mandate | Remand allowed retrial, ordinary remedy not adequate | Writ denied; extraordinary relief not warranted |
Key Cases Cited
- Marshall v. Gibson, 19 Ohio St.3d 10 (Ohio 1985) (precludes prejudicial error by denying instructional issues; allows retrial on whole case)
- Feeney v. Eshack, 129 Ohio App.3d 489 (9th Dist. 1998) (incomplete jury instructions require new trial if misleading)
- State Farm Fire & Gas. Co. v. Scandinavian Health Spa, Inc., 104 Ohio App.3d 582 (1st Dist. 1995) (incomplete charge can mandate new trial)
- Richardson v. Suster, 130 Ohio St.3d 82 (2011) (law-of-the-case doctrine; appeal lies to aggrieved party; limits of mandate)
- Hopkins v. Dyer, 104 Ohio St.3d 461 (2004) (law-of-the-case and consistency in appellate judgments)