Goodwin v. Olupona et al., 2013 ONCA 259

• Judge: Laskin, Blair and Epstein, JJ.A.
• Court: Court of Appeal (Ontario)
• Case Date: October 02, 2012
• Jurisdiction: Ontario
• Citations: 2013 ONCA 259;(2013), 305 O.A.C. 245 (CA)

Goodwin v. Olupona (2013), 305 O.A.C. 245 (CA)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2013] O.A.C. TBEd. AP.045

Adam Goodwin by his Litigation Guardian Debra Goodwin, Debra Goodwin, Brian Goodwin, Rachel Goodwin by her Litigation Guardian Debra Goodwin, and Jessica Goodwin by her Litigation Guardian Debra Goodwin (plaintiffs) v. Dr. Samuel Olupona , Dr. Orest Sochaniwshyj, Dr. Edward Cormode, Dr. Jane Doe, Nurse Jane Doe I Sulabha Burhanpurkar , Nurse Jane Doe II Bernice Thibedeau , and Orillia Soldiers' Memorial Hospital (defendants/ appellants / respondent )

(C53018; 2013 ONCA 259)

Indexed As: Goodwin v. Olupona et al.

Ontario Court of Appeal

Laskin, Blair and Epstein, JJ.A.

April 25, 2013.

Summary:

A boy was was injured shortly before his birth causing spastic quadriplegia. His family sued a doctor and two nurses (Nurses B and T), involved in the child's birth and the hospital where he was born. Shortly before trial, the family settled with the doctor and the trial proceeded as a cross-claim by the doctor against the hospital and the two nurses. The jury found Nurse B 75% liable and the hospital 25% liable for the child's injuries. The jury found no negligence on the part of the doctor or Nurse T and the claims against them were therefore dismissed. Nurse B and the hospital appealed, claiming that the jury's verdict was unreasonable and that the charge contained reversible errors.

The Ontario Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal.

Evidence - Topic 7061

Opinion evidence - Expert evidence - Particular matters - Professional standards of care - [See Hospitals - Topic 2054 ].

Hospitals - Topic 2054

Liability of hospitals - To patients - General - Failure to provide adequate personnel, equipment, training, protocols and procedure - In a medical malpractice suit respecting a child who was injured shortly before his birth, the jury found that the hospital breached the standard of care by failing to provide appropriately trained and supervised nursing staff and by failing to provide adequate equipment and resources - The hospital appealed, arguing that since no expert evidence was called respecting its standard of care, the jury had no basis to conclude that the hospital was negligent - The Ontario Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal - The jury was entitled to determine the hospital's standard of care in the absence of expert evidence where identifying the hospital's fundamental obligations was well within the "ken of the average juror" - Other evidence combined with the conventional knowledge of the jurors was sufficient to equip the jury with the information necessary to determine the hospital's standard of care in these areas - See paragraphs 30 to 39 and 92 to 102.

Hospitals - Topic 2054

Liability of hospitals - To patients - General - Failure to provide adequate personnel, equipment, training, protocols and procedure - [See Medicine - Topic 6863 ].

Medicine - Topic 6863

Nurses - Negligence - Patient care - Causation - A boy was injured shortly before his birth causing spastic quadriplegia - His family sued a doctor and two nurses (Nurses B and T), involved in the child's birth and the hospital where he was born - A few days into the trial, the doctor settled - The jury found Nurse B 75% liable and the hospital 25% liable for the child's injuries - Nurse B and the hospital appealed, claiming that the jury's verdict was unreasonable and that the charge contained reversible errors - The Ontario Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal - The court held that there was sufficient evidence to support the jury's conclusions that Nurse B and the hospital, by not monitoring the child's heart rate, failed to meet the requisite standard of care, and that their negligence caused the child's injuries - The verdict in those respects could not be said to be unreasonable - There was no error in the jury charge - See paragraphs 1 to 8 and 40 to 102.

Practice - Topic 5116

Jury trials - Functions or powers of a jury - Determination of standard of care - [See Hospitals - Topic 2054 ].

Cases Noticed:

McCannell v. McLean, [1937] S.C.R. 341, refd to. [para. 23].

Gutbir v. University Health Network et al. (2012), 287 O.A.C. 223; 2012 ONCA 66, refd to. [para. 23].

Neuzen v. Korn, [1995] 3 S.C.R. 674; 188 N.R. 161; 64 B.C.A.C. 241; 105 W.A.C. 241, refd to. [para. 66].

Ter Neuzen v. Korn - see Neuzen v. Korn.

Clements v. Clements, [2012] 2 S.C.R. 181; 431 N.R. 198; 346 D.L.R.(4th) 577; 2012 SCC 32, refd to. [para. 44].

Goodman v. Viljoen (2012), 299 O.A.C. 257; 2012 ONCA 896, refd to. [para. 45].

Ediger v. Johnston (2013), 333 B.C.A.C. 1; 571 W.A.C. 1; 442 N.R. 105; 2013 SCC 18, refd to. [para. 46].

1018202 Ontario Ltd. v. Hamilton Township Farmers' Mutual Fire Insurance Co. (2006), 209 O.A.C. 127; 267 D.L.R.(4th) 690 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 79].

Pereira v. Hamilton Township Farmers' Mutual Fire Insurance Co. - see 1018202 Ontario Ltd. v. Hamilton Township Farmers' Mutual Fire Insurance Co.

Landolfi v. Fargione (2006), 209 O.A.C. 89; 79 O.R.(3d) 767 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 80].

Kerr et al. v. Loblaws Inc. (2007), 224 O.A.C. 56; 2007 ONCA 371, refd to. [para. 81].

Brisco Estate v. Canadian Premier Life Insurance Co. et al. (2012), 299 O.A.C. 283; 113 O.R.(3d) 161; 2012 ONCA 854, refd to. [para. 95].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Picard, Ellen I., and Robertson, Gerald B., Legal Liability of Doctors and Hospitals in Canada (4th Ed. 2007), p. 460 [para. 32].

Counsel:

Steven Stieber and Elizabeth Bowker, for the appellants;

Peter W. Kryworuk and Cynthia B. Kuehl, for the respondent.

This appeal was heard on October 2, 2012, before Laskin, Blair and Epstein, JJ.A., of the Ontario Court of Appeal. The following decision was released for the court, by Epstein, J.A., on April 25, 2013.