Reynolds by Reynolds v. Decatur Mem'l Hosp. - 277 Ill. App. 3d 80, 214 Ill. Dec. 44, 660 N.E.2d 235 (1996)

Rule:

In a negligence action for medical malpractice, there must be a duty owed by defendant to the plaintiff, a breach of duty, an injury proximately caused by the breach, and resultant damages. The determination of whether the parties stood in such a relationship to one another that the law would impose on defendant a duty of reasonable conduct for the benefit of the plaintiff is a question of law.

Facts:

Plaintiff Kevin Thomas, a quadriplegic, claimed that his quadriplegia resulted from the medical malpractice of the hospital and health specialists. He was treated in the emergency room because he fell off from a couch that was less than two feet off from the ground. Upon examination an abnormal breathing was observed. Tests were conducted for infection and electrolyte or metabolic problems. Cervical spine X-rays were taken and appeared normal. The patient had a fever and the possible reasons for his condition were considered neurologic, traumatic, metabolic, infectious, or post-infectious problems. Plaintiff’s treating physician, Dr. Sharon Bonds, telephoned another physician, Dr. Thomas Fulbright at his home to discuss plaintiff’s condition. Dr. Fulbright considered this an informal inquiry and a courtesy service for which he did not bill. Eventually, plaintiff was diagnosed with a spinal cord injury by another hospital. Plaintiff filed a claim for damages. The Circuit Court of Macon County (Illinois) entered a judgment in favor of Dr. Fulbright. Plaintiff appealed. 

Issue:

Under the circumstances, could Dr. Fulbright be held liable for medical malpractice? 

Answer:

No.

Conclusion:

The court held that the telephone call did not create a physician-patient relationship so as to raise the duty that was enforceable in a medical malpractice action in light of the standards of protocol of the hospital at which the patient was being treated. Accordingly, the court affirmed the lower court’s decision.