; Medical Malpractice case sample
Learning Center
Plans & pricing Sign in
Sign Out
Your Federal Quarterly Tax Payments are due April 15th Get Help Now >>

Medical Malpractice case sample

VIEWS: 1,178 PAGES: 24

  • pg 1
									Natividad Agana vs. Dr. Miguel
Ampil, Dr. Juan Fuentes and
Professional Services Inc. (PSI)

Castillo, Antonette
Cordovez, Julie Ann
Gonda, Gerald Keneth
The Facts
• April 4, 1984 – Natividad Agana was
  rushed to the Medical City General Hospital
  due to difficulty in bowel movement and
  bloody anal discharge

• April 11, 1984- Dr. Ampil performed an
  anterior resection surgery on Natividad.
    Dr. Fuentes performed hysterectomy on
     Natividad Agana.
    The operation appeared to be flawed.
The Facts
• April 24, 1984- Natividad was released to
  the hospital
    She complained excruciating pain a few
      days after the surgery and consulted Dr.
      about it.

• May 9, 1984- Mr./Mrs. Agana went to the
  United States to seek further treatment.
The Facts
• August 31,1984- Mr./Mrs. Agana returned
  to the Philippines.

    2 weeks after, her daughter found a piece
     of gauze protruding from her vagina.

    A rectovaginal fistula was formed in
     Natividad’s reproductive organ
The Facts
• October 1984 – Natividad underwent
  another surgical operation to repair the

• November 12, 1984 – Mr./Mrs. Agana filed
  with the RTC Branch 96, Q.C., a complaint for
  damages against PSI, Dr. Ampil, and Dr.
The Facts
• Mr. Agana also filed with the PRC, an
  administrative complaint against Dr. Ampil
  and Dr. Fuentes for gross negligence and

• February 16, 1986 – Natividad died

• January 23, 1995 – PRC-BOM decided to
  dismiss the case
The Facts
• December 19, 1996 – Dr. Ampil filed a
  motion for reconsideration but it was denied

• Dr. Ampil, Dr. Fuentes and the PSI filed their
  petitions and defend themselves
The Decisions
• Regional Trial Court:
   • March 17, 1993 – RTC is in favor of the
     Aganas, finding PSI, Dr. Ampil & Dr.
     Fuentes liable for negligence and

   • Dr. Ampil and Dr. Fuentes shall pay for the
The Decisions
• Court of Appeals:
   • September 6, 1996 – the case against Dr.
     Fuentes is dismissed

• Supreme Court :
   • Medical City General Hospital and Dr.
     Miguel Ampil should pay 3 Million Pesos
     for medical negligence and for the
     damage done to the Aganas
The Concepts:

• Negligence

• Malpractice

• Doctrine of Res ipsa Loquitur
The Concepts:

• Doctrine of Respondeat Superior

• Writ of Execution

• Writ of Certiorari
The Concepts:

• Doctrine of Corporate negligence or
  Corporate Responsibility

• Preliminary Injunction

• Doctrine of Ostensible Agency
The Concepts:

• Agency by Estoppel

• Apparent Authority

• Captain of the Ship Rule

• The group agreed on the decision that Dr.
  Miguel and the PSI should be held liable
  for medical negligence they committed to
  Mrs. Natividad Agana during her operation
  for bowel resectioning. Dr. Fuentes is not
  liable on the said case because he was
  given the permission by Dr. Ampil to leave
  after performing Hysterectomy to Mrs.
  Agana after Dr. Ampil checked Dr.
  Fuentes’ work.

• Dr. Ampil is the head surgeon and he is
  the one responsible for the work of his
  whole team. Also, Dr. Ampil was informed
  by the nurse that there were missing 2
  sponges. Yes, they did search for it. But
  unfortunately, they were not able to find it.
  Having such case, it is Dr. Ampil’s
  responsibility to inform the patient about
  the missing gauzes and the possible
  things that might be done. It is merely
  obvious that Dr. Ampil failed to do so.

• Dr. Ampil must be given the punishment of
  revoking his license after having been
  found guilty of such act. Also, the PSI is
  liable on the said case because as an
  owner of a prestige health care institution,
  it is their responsibility to make up for the
  negligence acts done by their employees.
 They should properly monitor their medical
 staff as part of their responsibility on
 rendering quality patient care and on
 following the standards of the institution
 wherein they offer their service.
The Conclusion

• The case clearly shows medical
  malpractice. Dr. Ampil has greater liability
  on the fault he has done. As a
  professional, he should perform within the
  standards of giving proper care to patients.
  The malpractice that happened should
  have been avoided if he clearly informed
  Mrs. Natividad Agana about the two pieces
  of gauze which has been left on her
  abdomen during the operation.
The Conclusion

  If Dr. Ampil was in right judgment he would
  not have misled Natividad about the
  malpractice that had happened to her.
  Based on the evidences shown, Dr. Ampil
  was the one being negligent in the said
  act. Thus, he should be the one to blame
  for the wrong act.
The Conclusion
•    The Professional Services Incorporated
    should also be liable under the principle of
    apparent authority (agency relationship
    between hospital and doctors who practice
    in its premises). They failed to follow
    established standard of conduct to which it
    should conform as a corporation. Dr. Ampil
    was an agent of PSI because he performs
    within the premises of the hospital.
The Conclusion
• It is reasonable to conclude that PSI, as
  the operator of the hospital, has actual
  knowledge of the procedures carried out,
  particularly the report of the attending
  nurses that the two pieces of gauze were
  missing. According to the doctrine of
  corporate negligence, PSI is directly liable
  for such breach of duty because it did not
  perform the necessary supervision or
  exercise thorough efforts in the
  supervision of Dr. Ampil and Fuentes and
  its nursing staff in the performance of their
The Conclusion

•    It was duly established that PSI operates
    the Medical City Hospital for the purpose
    and under the concept of providing
    comprehensive medical services to the
    public. Accordingly, it has the duty to
    exercise reasonable care to protect from
    harm all patients admitted into its facility
    for medical treatment.
The Conclusion

• A physician must possess the reasonable
  degree of learning, skill and experience
  required by his profession. At the same
  time, he must apply reasonable care and
  diligence in the exercise of his skill and the
  application of his knowledge, and exert his
  best judgment. If these key points are
  properly applied any liability will not
  happen or be avoided.

To top