Niles Case Study

The injuries sustained in the Niles v City of San Rafael were foreseeable. The injuries resulted from the commission and the omission of act from the defendants. There was negligence in the city’s supervision of the school playground and medical malpractice at Mt. Zion Hospital. The medical negligence was nonfeasance meaning there was a failure to act when there is a duty to act as a reasonability to safeguard a person rights. The Plaintiff was an innocent party whom rights were violated by the defendants. The violation of the rights resulted in injury below is a summary of the case and how there was negligence on the defendants’ behalf.
Kelly B. Niles was playing softball on a school playground in a recreation program which was operated …show more content…
Negligence is consider tort and is a civil wrong committed against the person that the court remedies in the form of action for damages occurred such compensation. Negligence is the unintentional commission or omission of an act that a reasonably prudent person would or would not do. It is a form of conduct which is caused by the carelessness of the standard of care on reasonable members of the society; In the medical field it is consider malpractice. The person who shows negligence does not use their best judgment against possible risk. For example, in the case Dr. Haskins did not examine Kelly nor review his chart. He then advises Mr. Niles to take his son home. A red alert for negligence was also during that time a patient discharge with a possible head injury would be given information on what to look for if the condition does not improve. Mr. Niles was not given that information however he had a first aid which told him what the signs where for intracranial bleeding. If Kelly condition would have been left untreated he would have …show more content…
Niles had every right to file a lawsuit against the City of San Rafael because there was a breach of duty that caused foreseeable damage to the Kelly. If Kelly would have suffered no harm, then that would have not been grounds to sue. Mr. Niles won the case because he was able to prove that all four elements of negligence were present. Mr. Niles was able to prove that duty of care was not properly conducted. Duty is defined as the legal obligation of care, performance, or observance to safeguard the rights of others. The lack of supervision on the school playground which made the principal and the school district liable for the injuries sustained. The Mt. Zion Hospital was obligated by law to provide timely care and to stabilize Kelly. Kelly should have never been sent home if he was still showing signs of a head injury. It was unfortunate that there was a miscommunication in the admitting department. The quality of any patients’ health requires the collaboration across. Dr. Haskins should have contacted the director of that department to get Kelly admitted in the hospital for he was a special