WILLIE LEE MOORE AND MARY MOORE, HIS WIFE, APPELLANTS,
v.
THE SCHOOL BOARD OF PINELLAS COUNTY, FLORIDA AND CONTINENTAL CASUALTY COMPANY, APPELLEES
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Willie Lee Moore sued the School Board of Pinellas County and its insurer after a student nurse trained under the school board's program negligently inserted a catheter, causing injury. The court reversed summary judgment, finding material questions about the school board's supervision and liability that required trial.
The court held that genuine issues of material fact exist regarding the school board's liability and supervision of the student nurse, precluding summary judgment. The case must proceed to trial to determine whether the school board exercised supervisory control over the student's actions.
[1] A summary final judgment is improper when genuine issues of material fact exist regarding liability.
[2] A school board may be liable for the negligent actions of a student nurse if the school board retains a degree of supervision or control over the student's clinical pract…
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“On review of the record on appeal, we find there are genuine issues of material fact to be determined as to the liability, if any, of the appellees in this cause.”
The court's holding that summary judgment was inappropriate because factual disputes existed regarding the school board's liability
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceWillie Lee Moore was recovering from surgery at Bay Front Medical Center when Dr. Babcock ordered a Foley catheter insertion. Ronald Curran, a student…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Respondeat Superior cases and more on FLexlaw
HOBSON, Judge.
Appellant Willie Lee Moore was a patient in Bay Front Medical Center recovering from an operation performed by Dr. R. Huston Babcock. On May 20, 1970, Dr. Babcock ordered an indwelling Foley catheter be inserted in appellant. One Ronald Curran, who at the time was a student nurse engaged in on-job training at Bay Front Medical Center, inserted the catheter. At the time Curran was a trainee at the hospital under an agreement between the appellee school board and the hospital. Appellants allege that Curran negligently and carelessly performed the catheterization causing appellant Willie Lee Moore’s penis to become swollen, inflamed and painful, which required surgery.
The agreement between the appellee school board and the hospital contained, among other things, the following:
"IV. THE AFFILIATED AGENCY (HOSPITAL) AGREES TO:
**
4.c. Provide the instruction, guidance, supervision, counseling and evaluation of the practical nurse students in cooperation with the SCHOOL.
**
5. Share and assist in the responsibilities for the guidance and supervision of the students, particularly in restricted and specialized areas.
**
V. THE SCHOOL AGREES:
**
3. That the faculty shall be responsible for:
a. Selecting patient assignments in cooperation with the hospital professional nursing personnel and supervising jointly the practical clinical nursing practice learning experience of students.”
Curran testified on deposition that a registered nurse employed by the appellee school board supervised him during the time he was in training at the hospital.
The appellee Continental at the time was the insurer of the school board.
The trial court, on motion for summary final judgment filed by the appellee school board, granted a summary final judgment in its behalf on the grounds that the school board did not supervise, control or direct Curran’s actions in regards to the care of the appellant.
On review of the record on appeal, we find there are genuine issues of material fact to be determined as to the liability, if any, of the appellees in this cause.
For the foregoing reasons the summary final judgment is reversed and the cause remanded for further proceedings.
Reversed and remanded.
MANN, C. J., and McNULTY, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Taylor v. Fla. City, 322 So. 2d 35 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975)…, it follows that the summary final judgment appealed, except as to Shriver, was incorrectly granted. Reed v. Jim Moran Pontiac, Inc., Fla.App. 1974, 292 So. 2d 392; Smith v. Quinn, Fla. App.1974, 291 So. 2d 264; Moore v. School Board, Fla.App.1974, 291 So. 2d 244; and 30 Fla.Jur., Summary Judgment § 11. We have considered the record, all points in the briefs and arguments of counsel in the light of the controlling principles of law, and have concluded that reversible error has been demonstrated. Therefore,…
-
Moore v. Babcock, 291 So. 2d 246 (Fla. 2d DCA 1974)…HOBSON, Judge. This cause is a companion with Moore v. School Board of Pinellas County et al., 291 So. 2d 244. Appellants appeal a summary final judgment entered in favor of appellees. We have examined the record on appeal and find that the appellees have satisfied the requirements of Holl v. Talcott, Fla.1966, 191 So. 2d 40, as to their entitlement to a s…