From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Haber v. Cross County Hospital

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Oct 28, 1975
37 N.Y.2d 888 (N.Y. 1975)

Summary

In Haber, the Court of Appeals noted that this commonsense hospital regulation adopted in recognition of the frailties of older patients does not require medical direction and only administrative action is needed to implement the rule.

Summary of this case from Gould v. Health Hosps

Opinion

Argued September 4, 1975

Decided October 28, 1975

Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department, P. RAYMOND SIRIGNANO, J.

Daniel J. Friedman for appellants.

William Glatzer for respondent.


MEMORANDUM. The general rule that a hospital is not liable in negligence for the failure to erect bed rails, absent professional medical direction (Grace v Manhattan Eye, Ear Throat Hosp., 301 N.Y. 660; Mossman v Albany Med. Center Hosp., 34 A.D.2d 263), does not apply where the hospital establishes a rule that bed rails were to be set up in all cases where the patient is over 50 years of age. This common-sense precaution adopted by the hospital in recognition of the frailties of older patients did not require medical direction. Only administrative action was needed to implement the rule.

Administrative work is part of the service that a hospital provides and for which the hospital is responsible. (See Sutherland v New York Polyclinic Med. School Hosp., 273 App. Div. 29, 30-31, affd 298 N.Y. 682, mot for rearg den 298 N.Y. 794.) Moreover, the hospital's failure to abide by its own rule is some evidence of negligence. (Danbois v New York Cent. R.R. Co., 12 N.Y.2d 234, 239.)

Since there was a basis for the imposition of liability upon the hospital, the order of the Appellate Division should be reversed and the case remitted to that court for a review of the facts. (CPLR 5613.)

Chief Judge BREITEL and Judges JASEN, GABRIELLI, JONES, WACHTLER, FUCHSBERG and COOKE concur.

Order reversed and case remitted to the Appellate Division, Second Department, for further proceedings in accordance with the memorandum herein, with costs to abide the event.


Summaries of

Haber v. Cross County Hospital

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Oct 28, 1975
37 N.Y.2d 888 (N.Y. 1975)

In Haber, the Court of Appeals noted that this commonsense hospital regulation adopted in recognition of the frailties of older patients does not require medical direction and only administrative action is needed to implement the rule.

Summary of this case from Gould v. Health Hosps
Case details for

Haber v. Cross County Hospital

Case Details

Full title:SOL HABER et al., Appellants, v. CROSS COUNTY HOSPITAL, Respondent

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Oct 28, 1975

Citations

37 N.Y.2d 888 (N.Y. 1975)
378 N.Y.S.2d 369
340 N.E.2d 734

Citing Cases

Petralia v. Glenhaven Health Care Org.

The plaintiff's expert opined that the failure to raise those bed rails was a proximate cause of the…

Mertsaris v. 73rd Corp.

"A It would be to us, yes. It would be to me" (emphasis supplied). In the second place, even assuming a…