Snyder Vs. Turk Case Study

The Patrick Haynes case involves the violation of reasonable care, after being assaulted by three correction officers that caused intentional trauma and injuries to his rectum area. The details of the case are that inmate Patrick Haynes assaulted a correction officer after being written up for misconduct. Inmate Patrick Haynes assaulted the correction officer by throwing feces and urine in the unsuspecting officer’s face. Later that night after lights out, the three correction officers went to his cell, restrained him and forcibly inserted a broom stick into his rectum. The next morning he was found by day shift officers and transported to the infirmary. Patrick Haynes after receiving medical care sued with judgement being found in his favor.

Board of County Commissioners of Brevard V. Snyder set a precedent since the Court concluded the comprehensive plan, provides for future land use through gradual and ordered growth, and it is not a literal guide. Thus, Local governments have the discretion to decide that certain land uses should be denied, even if they comply with comprehensive plan guidelines.

Facts Plaintiff Nosrat Khajavi, who is an anesthesiologist, was terminated under an oral contract stating for a specified term. This was caused by a dispute over the plaintiff and a ophthalmologist on how the proceeding should be on the specific surgery that happened that happened in the operating room which lead to an bigger argument. The ophthalmologist’s brother was the head of the anesthesia group. Then Feather River Anesthesia

The plaintiff Yolanda Pinnelas has evidence of a documented necrotic tissue injury that resulted from a Mitomycin infiltration that was not appropriately monitored on the night in question. There is no documentation that would support adequate monitoring up to the point of the infiltration. However, there is evidence proving that there was a nursing staff shortage on a unit with a high census of sick patients. The defense could claim that Jeffery Chambers did not have adequate rest and his fatigue contributed to the inadequate monitoring of Yolanda Pinnelas. I major defense for the plaintiff is if it is not charted it did not happen. The documentation in this case study does not paint a clear picture of events that took place and leave

malpractice and negligence. The Darling's (Plaintiff) felt that the hospital, nursing staff and emergency room doctor all played an important part in the Plaintiff losing his leg due to neglect.

6. Holding: As stated in the case: “one who, without a privilege to do so, by extreme and outrageous conduct intentionally causes severe emotional distress to another, with bodily harm resulting from such distress, is subject to liability for such emotional distress and bodily harm even though he has committed no heretofore recognized common law tort.”

The plaintiff in Ard v. East Jefferson General Hospital, stated on 20 May, she had rang the nurses station to inform the nursing staff that her husband was experiencing symptoms of nausea, pain, and shortness of breathe. After ringing the call button for several times her spouse received his medication. Mrs. Ard noticed that her husband continued to have difficulty breathing and ringing from side to side, the patient spouse rang the nursing station for approximately an hour and twenty-five minutes until the defendant (Ms. Florscheim) enter the room and initiated a code blue, which Mr. Ard didn’t recover. The expert witness testified that the defendant failed to provide the standard of care concerning the decease and should have read the physician’s progress notes stating patient is high risk upon assessment and observation. The defendant testified she checked on the patient but no documentation was noted. The defendant expert witness disagrees with breech of duty, which upon cross-examination the expert witness agrees with the breech of duty. The district judge, upon judgment, the defendant failed to provide the standard of care (Pozgar, 2012, p. 215-216) and award the plaintiff for damages from $50,000 to $150,000 (Pozgar, 2012, p. 242).

The facts of this case are that Dr. Guiles who is self-conscious of his prostate cancer diagnosis is treated horrendously when he finally decides to have surgery ( Buchbinder, Shanks & Buchbinder, 2014). Considering that Dr. Guiles is already sensitive about his condition, his unbearable symptoms are not helping matters (Buchbinder et al, 2014). Upon arrival at the hospital, he is treated subpar. The admitting clerk is rude and unbecoming to a patient who isn’t feeling well and who is embarrassed about his sickness (Buchbinder et al., 2014). To make matters worse, he has to find his own way up to the floor by walking, which causes him to be even later in checking in because of the need to stop frequently to urinate as well as having difficulty in walking (Buchbinder et al., 2014). Once he arrives on the floor, the charge nurse is not welcoming and unprofessional (Buchbinder et al., 2014). After figuring out what to do with the paperwork; and the nurse aide delivers Dr. Guiles to his room, the nurse aide does not offer to help settle him in (Buchbinder et al., 2014). Therefore, Dr. Guiles is faced with battling obnoxious family members who are on his bed and to make matters worse someone is in the bathroom which doesn’t help his need of having to frequently urinate (Buchbinder et al., 2014). When the issues are brought up to the charge nurse, the charge nurse accuses Dr. Guiles of wanting preferential treatment

The defendant Nurse Jackie may defend herself by saying she notate all the patient signs and symptoms. She also noted on the patient chart that the other symptoms have not improved. The defendant Dr. James may say that every patient that come the emergency department with a headache does not receive a CT scan. He may also mention that he checked the patient and his pain was gone.

University Hospital is a well known hospital with a level 1 trauma treatment center for the tri-county area of a northwestern state, the hospital enjoys the fact they are known for their promising reputation among healthcare professionals and the public they serve. Jan Adams is an OR supervisor that has been working there for ten years, as a professional she makes surgeons follow protocol as required and enjoys working with trauma patients. One Friday night, which is the busiest day of the week for the trauma department; the unit was notified that a helicopter was on its way with a 42 year old man who had been in a car accident. Shortly after the patient arrived to the trauma center, the resident and other medical staff noted that he was in very bad physical conditions, needed immediate surgery or otherwise he was going to die. The issue was that the on call surgeon had to be present during the surgery and had not yet arrived, but regardless of the matter and protocol they proceeded with medically treating the patient immediately. The concern is that in doing so they violated medical procedures and put the patients safety at risk, this lead to a long list of ethical issues for example, patient well-being, impaired healthcare professional, adherence to professional codes of ethical conduct, adherence to the organization’s mission statement, ethical standards, and values statements, management’s role and responsibility, failure

TEACHER had a DUTY of CARE to the PLAINTIFF. TEACHER BREACHED his DUTY of CARE to keep the PLAINTIFF SAFE by NOT SUPERVISING the PLAINTIFF PROPERLY AND BY NOT GETTING IMMEDIATE MEDICAL ATTENTION for the PLAINTIFF after finding out about the PLAINTIFF'S INJURY. This BREACH OF DUTY was both the ACTUAL CAUSE and PROXIMATE CAUSES of the PLAINTIFF'S INJURY.

A child has been injured and has been rushed to a hospital by the child’s mother’s boyfriend. Once the mother arrives the doctor ask to speak with the mother privately. The mother allows the boyfriend to come and hear what the doctor needs to say. While the doctor is talking the boyfriend needs to step away to answer his phone. When he comes back the mother and doctor are both gone. The boyfriend walks over to the nurse who was there while the doctor was speaking with the child’s mother and ask the nurse to fill him in on what he missed. That’s when the nurse repeats everything the doctor had told the child’s mother. The nurse actions caused a breach in HIPAA laws because the mother never gave consent for her boyfriend to receive healthcare information regarding her child. The nurse could have avoided that HIPAA violation by telling the boyfriend she is sorry, but she can’t give him that information and to ask the child’s mother

The case involving Perin v. Hayne seeks to determine if the defendant Dr. Robert Hayne, was in any way negligent when he performed a surgical procedure on the plaintiff Ilene Perin, described as a cervical fusion. This particular procedure sought to alleviate pressure, numbness, weakness and pain in the plaintiff’s back. As a result of this procedure, the plaintiff was left with vocal cord damage that severely diminished her ability to speak above a whisper. This is supported by the reading, “but plaintiff alleged she suffered paralysis of a vocal cord because of injury to the right recurrent laryngeal nerve during surgery” (Showalter, 2017, pg.171). The plaintiff, Ilene Perin, filed suit against the defendant Dr. Hayne, under the guise of res ipsa loquitur, specific negligence, battery and or trespass and breach of express warranty. Applicable law and evidence must be applied in this case to determine if there was a considerable difference between the consented surgical procedure and the surgery that was actually done.

During my clinical competency placement, I was working on a surgical ward when a registered nurse on duty asked me to assist Mr. A with his shower. This incident happened on the fifth day of my clinical practice. He was a dementia patient and had undergone right knee total joint replacement. She also informed me that the patient did not like too many people in his room because of his dementia. When I went into his room, his wife was there with him. I talked to the patient about having a shower and getting dressed to look smart and he agreed to have a shower. The patient got out of the bed and walked to the bathroom and sat on the shower chair to have his shower. Then I asked his wife if I needs to stay with him to assist with shower, she said she can help him as she was taking care for him at home since he has been diagnosed with dementia. Therefore, I left the patient with his wife to help with his shower and told her to ring the bell if she needs any help. After some time I left the room, the wife rang the bell. As soon as I entered the room, I heard him shouting at his wife and she started crying and left the hospital. So I had to stay with him. He was very capable of washing himself and I just had to help him wash his back as he requested. After he had washed, I asked him if he was ready to get out of the bath, he started shouting at me.

According to Finkelman and Kenner (2016) “malpractice is an act or continuing conduct of a professional that does not meet the standard of professional competence and results in provable damages to the patient” (p. 185). In order to have a successful lawsuit filed, there are four criteria that must be met. First, there must have been a nurse-patient relationship, where the nurse provided care. Second, the nurse