I. STANTON HUDMON, M.D., APPELLANT,
v.
M. LEE MARTIN, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Dr. Hudmon appealed a partial summary judgment finding that a hospital scrub nurse was his borrowed servant for whom he was liable. The court affirmed that as a matter of law, a nurse assigned to assist a surgeon whose duties require professional knowledge and skill is under the surgeon's control and constitutes a borrowed servant.
A nurse employed by a hospital but assigned to assist a doctor in performing an operation, whose duties involve professional knowledge, skill and experience, is under the control of the doctor and is a borrowed servant for whose negligent acts the doctor is responsible.
[1] A nurse employed by a hospital, assigned to assist a surgeon in an operation, is a borrowed servant of the surgeon when performing duties requiring professional knowledge…
[2] A surgeon is responsible for the negligent acts of a hospital-employed nurse acting as a borrowed servant during an operation.
Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“A nurse employed by a hospital, but assigned to assist a doctor in performance of an operation, whose duties involve professional knowledge, skill and experience, is under the control of the doctor, and is a borrowed servant for whose negligent acts the doctor is responsible.”
States the controlling legal standard for the borrowed servant doctrine in the medical context
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceDuring surgery, Dr. Hudmon ordered scrub nurse Mundy to fill a syringe with a specific solution. Mundy, an employee of the hospital assigned to assist…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Borrowed Servant Doctrine cases and more on FLexlaw
MILLS, Judge.
Martin, appellee-plaintiff, sued Dr. Hud-mon, appellant-defendant, for damages alleging that Mundy, a scrub nurse, an agent, employee or borrowed servant of the doctor, while assisting the doctor in an operation, negligently filled a syringe with an improper solution which was administered by the doctor to Martin, resulting in his injury. Dr. Hudman denied all of Martin’s allegations, specifically that Mun-dy was his agent, employee or borrowed servant. Martin moved for partial summary judgment on liability, and the trial court enterd a partial summary judgment for him. From the judgment, Dr. Hudmon takes this interlocutory appeal. The sole issue here is whether the deposition testimony of Dr. Hudmon supports the trial court’s finding that as a matter of law Mundy was a borrowed servant of Dr. Hudmon.
The substance of Dr. Hudmon’s deposition testimony is that a scrub nurse, such as Mundy, assisting in the type operation planned, required at least some minimal education, training and skill in filling a syringe with the solution called for by the doctor. While preparing Martin for immediate surgery, the doctor ordered Mundy to fill a syringe with a certain proper solution. Mundy filled the syringe with an improper solution, other than ordered, which the doctor administered to Martin causing complications which made it necessary to cancel the operation and resulting in injury to Martin. Mundy, an employee of the hospital in whose operating room the above events took place, was assigned by the hospital to assist Dr. Hudmon in the operation.
A nurse employed by a hospital, but assigned to assist a doctor in performance of an operation, whose duties involve professional knowledge, skill and experience, is under the control of the doctor, and is a borrowed servant for whose negligent acts the doctor is responsible. Buzan v. Mercy Hospital, Inc., 203 So. 2d 11 (Fla.App.1967); 29 A.L.R.3d 1075.
Based upon the facts submitted to the trial court and the law applicable thereto, the trial court properly found as a matter of law that Mundy was a borrowed servant of Dr. Hudmon and correctly rendered partial summary judgment in favor of Martin.
The interlocutory appeal is dismissed.
BOYER, Acting C. J., and JOHNSON, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Variety Child's. Hosp., Inc. v. Perkins, 382 So. 2d 331 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980)…acts from the hospital to the doctor. The most [*335] familiar example of this process occurs in the operating room where each of the attending personnel comes under the authority of the surgeon as the “captain of the ship.” E. g., Hudmon v. Martin, 315 So. 2d 516 (Fla.lst DCA 1975); Buzan v. Mercy Hospital, Inc., 203 So. 2d 11 (Fla.3d DCA 1967). But this principle has utterly no application to the case at bar, in which the negligence occurred when the surgery had long since been completed and the surgeon wa…
-
Abelardo Vargas, M.D. v. Consuelo Dulzaides, 520 So. 2d 306 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988)…ital, was liable for negligence of residents who had exclusive responsibility for post-surgical care of patient). A surgeon in the operating room may be liable for the acts of assisting personnel as the “captain of the ship,” e.g. Hudmon v. Martin, 315 So. 2d 516 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975); however, a surgeon will not be liable for the negligence of a fellow specialist such as an anesthetist or an intern. Dohr v. Smith, 104 So. 2d 29 (Fla.1958); Fortson v. McNamara, 508 So. 2d 35 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987); Parmerter v. Os…
-
Bradley v. S. Baptist Hosp. OF Fla., Inc., 943 So. 2d 202 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006)…can come under the direction and control of a physician, and liability for the nurse’s actions then shifts from the hospital to the doctor. Variety Children’s Hosp., Inc., v. Perkins, 382 So. 2d 331, 334 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980); Hudmon, M.D., v. Martin, 315 So. 2d 516, 517 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975). “The most familiar example of this process occurs in the operating room where each of the attending personnel comes under the authority of the surgeon as the 'captain of the ship.’ ” Perkins, 382 So. 2d at 334-35. In order…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Buzan v. Mercy Hosp., Inc., 203 So. 2d 11 (Fla. 3d DCA 1967)