What sources might the court consider when interpreting the statute in question? [See: Rome v. Flower Memorial Hospital, 635 N.E.2d 1239 (OH).]
Barbara Rome entered Flower Memorial Hospital to undergo a series of X-rays. When she was ready for the X-rays, she was assisted by a student radiological intern. The intern placed Rome on the X-ray table and strapped her onto the table correctly; however, the intern did not properly fasten the footboard, which was located at the foot of the table. As a result of this error, Rome fell and was hurt when the table was raised. As a consequence, Rome brought a lawsuit against Flower Memorial Hospital, alleging that the ordinary negligence of the intern had caused her injury. In contrast, the hospital argued that the lawsuit involved a medical claim, as defined under the state’s medical malpractice statute. Whether a case involves ordinary negligence or a medical claim would determine whether the state’s two-year statute of limitations for negligence or the state’s one-year statute of limitations for medical claims would apply. This case clearly involves a difference of opinion on the interpretation of a statute. What sources might the court consider when interpreting the statute in question? [See: Rome v. Flower Memorial Hospital, 635 N.E.2d 1239 (OH).]
Trending now
This is a popular solution!
Step by step
Solved in 2 steps
