Corbett v. Weisband

551 A.2d 1059 (1988)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

These are five consolidated appeals and cross-appeals from judgments entered in two medical malpractice actions filed by P against two doctors, a hospital, and an orthopedic association. At the time of trial, P was sixty-eight (68) years old. P developed knee sores while scrubbing floors in Philadelphia during the late 1930s and early 1940s. These problems recurred during the late 1950s and early 1960s. In 1969 Ms. Corbett suffered an additional injury to her knee, for which she received treatment. In October 1971, surgery was performed on her left knee to have cartilage removed. In 1973, P came under the care of Dr. DeMoura. Dr. DeMoura performed surgery on her spine in 1974 and on her right knee in 1975 or 1976. Dr. DeMoura continued to treat P through October 1978. In December 1978, she came under the care of Dr. Weisband, for treatment of a knee infection. In October 1980, she had a left knee fusion performed by Dr. Weisband, and according to Dr. Greene, the left knee fusion was not successful. Dr. Greene performed a total knee replacement on her left knee. The wound in front of her left knee joint had opened, and she was discharged once the wound began to heal. P again was admitted to the hospital because the wound had not yet healed. In November 1982, P broke her left leg as she was climbing out of bed. She remained in the hospital for nine months following this admission. In April 1983, the knee implant was removed because it had become infected. Several months later, P's leg was amputated above the knee because it was Dr. Greene's belief that the infection would never clear. P sued. Significant medical testimony showed that Dr. Greene's knee replacement was negligent. The court entered a compulsory nonsuit in favor of Dr. DeMoura. Dr. Weisband argued that Dr. Greene’s intervening conduct was highly extraordinary, and a superseding cause. P got the verdict for $150,000 in damages. Ds appealed because their judgment notwithstanding the verdict was denied. P appealed over Dr. DeMoura being nonsuited, and the damages awarded were inadequate.