Curtis

Curtis v. Santa Clara Valley Medical Center

Good Law
110 Cal. App. 4th 796·2 Cal. Rptr. 3d 73·2003 Cal. App. LEXIS 1092·2003 Daily Journal DAR 7997·2003 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 6382
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 18, 2003H024238California2,432 words

Opinion

Opinion

Rushing, J.

Plaintiff and appellant Scott Michael Curtis sued defendants and respondents Santa Clara Valley Medical Center and County of Santa Clara for medical malpractice. The trial court entered a judgment of nonsuit. On appeal, Curtis argues the evidence supported an inference of negligence even though no expert testimony was presented. We disagree and will affirm.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

On May 11, 1998, Curtis was rendered a paraplegic as a result of an automobile accident. On May 19, 1998, Curtis underwent posterior spinal fusion surgery. The surgery was designed to stabilize Curtis’s spine and achieve fusion through the insertion of hardware into Curtis’s back.

As part of the surgery, Curtis had to be placed “face down” in a “prone position.” Pressure on his face was reduced by a foam pillow that rested against his face, head and cheeks reducing pressure to Curtis’s eyes, nose and mouth. According to Curtis’s anesthesiologist, Dr. Steven King, Curtis’s “head was positioned in a foam headrest which had a spot placed face down in his foam headrest which is a cutout for his eyes and his nose.”

The foam pillow was used when patients were operated on in prone…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.