[Download] "Golden v. Johnson Memorial Hospital" by the Court of Appeals of the State of Connecticut * eBook PDF Kindle ePub Free
eBook details
- Title: Golden v. Johnson Memorial Hospital
- Author : the Court of Appeals of the State of Connecticut
- Release Date : January 30, 2001
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 74 KB
Description
Argued April 5 Opinion In this medical malpractice action, the plaintiff, Robert P. Golden, Jr., appeals from the summary judgment rendered by the trial court in favor of the defendants, Johnson Memorial Hospital, Inc. (hospital), and Connecticut Pathology Associates, P.C. (Associates), on their defense that the plaintiff's action is time barred pursuant to General Statutes § 52-584. 1 The plaintiff claims that summary judgment was improper because (1) the repose section of § 52-584 was tolled by the continuing course of conduct doctrine, and (2) the repose section would bar his claim before he could have known that he had suffered actionable harm in violation of article first, §§ 1 and 10, and article first, § 20, of the constitution of Connecticut, as amended by article twenty-one of the amendments, and the fourteenth amendment to the United States constitution. 2 We affirm the judgment of the trial court. 3 The following facts and procedural history are relevant to our resolution of the plaintiff's appeal. In March, 1986, the plaintiff went to the hospital because he had been suffering from a prolonged cold for over two months and, during the previous two weeks, a lump had formed on the right side of his neck. A few days later, on March 24, 1986, the plaintiff underwent surgery at the hospital to have the lump removed. On the same day, samples of the lump tissue were sent to Associates for analysis. Arturo P. Villa, a pathologist, 4 issued a final pathology report (1986 report) on a hospital letterhead diagnosing the tissue as nonspecific lymphadenitis, possibly of bacterial origin. The surgeon told the plaintiff that he was cured. 5 Thereafter, the plaintiff sought no further treatment.