Legal Research, Analysis, and Writing by William H. Putman & Jennifer Albright

Author:William H. Putman & Jennifer Albright [Putman, William H.]
Language: eng
Format: epub
Publisher: Cengage Learning
Published: 2017-07-10T04:00:00+00:00

***

ANALYSIS

such detention.” Lee v. Alexander, 607 So.2d 30, 35

I.§ 9. At the close of the testimony, the defendants

(Miss.1992) (citing Page v. Wiggins, 595 So.2d 1291

moved for a directed verdict on all counts except the

(Miss.1992); Thornhill v. Wilson, 504 So.2d 1205,

medical malpractice negligence claim. The trial court

1208 (Miss.1987) (citing State ex rel. Powell v. Moore,

granted the motion, thereby taking from the jury the

252 Miss. 471, 174 So.2d 352, 354 (1965); Hart v.

claims of intentional infliction of emotional distress,

Walker, 720 F.2d 1436, 1439 (5th Cir.1983))).

false imprisonment, gross negligence, and assault

[5] § 12. Morgan contends that the trial court

and battery. Morgan argues that there was sufficient

erred in granting a directed verdict because she was

evidence to make out a jury question on all of these

locked up against her will, and the determination of

claims, and thus, the directed verdict for the defen-

whether her detainment was a reasonable one should

dants was reversible error.

have been a question of fact for the jury. This Court

[1][2][3] § 10. This Court conducts a de novo

finds that such an argument lacks merit. Morgan

review of a motion for directed verdict. Northern Elec.

consented to the treatment at the Hospital, and such

Co. v. Phillips, 660 So.2d 1278, 1281 (Miss.1995). If

treatment includes placing patients who are out of

Copyright 2018 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. WCN 02-200-203

we find that the evidence favorable to the non-moving

control in a secure environment for the protection of

party and the reasonable inferences drawn therefrom

both the patient and the others at the Hospital.

present a question for the jury, the motion should not

§ 13. The evidence indicates that prior to the

be *1042 granted. Id. (citing Pittman v. Home Indem.

1996 incident in question, Morgan had undergone a

Co., 411 So.2d 87, 89 (Miss.1982)). This Court has

psychological evaluation that concluded she was suf-

also held that an issue should only be presented to the

fering from personality disorders. She had a history of

jury when the evidence creates a question of fact on

mental illness dating back to 1990 and was diagnosed

which reasonable jurors could disagree. Herrington v.

as having been severely depressed upon her admittance

Spell, 692 So.2d 93, 97 (Miss.1997).

to the Hospital in June of 1996. She also suffered from

A. False Imprisonment

hallucinations and crying episodes. Moreover, on the

morning of the alleged incident, Morgan’s doctor noted

[4] § 11. False imprisonment has only two elements:

in the medical records that she was experiencing trances

“detention of the plaintiff and the unlawfulness of

that lasted up to fifteen minutes.

48372_ch10_hr_284-309.indd 308

6/2/17 6:40 PM

Chapter 10 / Legal Analysis: Issue Identification—Spotting The Issue 309

§ 14. Morgan argues that the mere fact that she

not only factually distinguishable from the case at bar,

was undergoing treatment in a Hospital does not mean

but is also from another jurisdiction and, therefore,

that the Hospital is justified in performing any medi-

not controlling on this Court. In Felton, the patient

cal procedures it deems warranted. Although such an

suffered a broken clavicle and was taken to a Chicago

argument is a valid one, it is not warranted in the case

Hospital for treatment. Id. at 192. After an altercation

sub judice.

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.