RADIOLOGIST
OSTENSIBLE AGENT OF HOSPITAL
MEJIA V. COMMUNITY HOSPITAL
In Mejia v. Community Hospital of San
Bernardino (2002) 02 CDOS 6291, a patient went to a hospital for an
emergency and subsequently sued the hospital and a radiologist for medical
malpractice. The hospital moved for a nonsuit at trial on the ground that
there was no evidence that it was negligent. The trial court granted the
motion and dismissed the hospital. However, the Court of Appeal held that
the issue of whether the radiologist was an agent of the hospital should
have gone to the jury.
The court held that the hospital should
not have been dismissed because the jury must decide whether the
radiologist was an ostensible agent of the hospital. A radiologist may be
an ostensible agent of the hospital if the patient reasonably believes
that the radiologist is an agent of the hospital. Thus, hospitals may find
it impossible to obtain a non-suit at a trial involving emergency care
because physicians such as emergency department physicians or radiologists
may be found to be ostensible agents of the hospital. Even if there is no
evidence that the hospital was negligent, the patient need only show that
he or she sought treatment from a physician at the hospital to defeat the
hospital’s nonsuit motion.
The court held that the question as to
whether the radiologist was an ostensible agent of the hospital was for
the jury, despite the fact that the patient never knew about the services
provided by the radiologist, the radiologist was assigned to the patient’s
case by his group, not the hospital, and the patient chose the hospital
because it was close and did not change his mind because of the hospital’s
reputation.
Mejia v. Community Hospital points out
the difficulty hospitals and medical groups have when they are alleged to
be held vicariously liable for the acts of their physicians or other
health professionals.
