Evening star., 1942-06-30
Appellate Court
Holds Hospitals
May Be Sued
Grunts Nurse Right
To Collect $4,000
In Damage Case
BY HORACE KNOWLES.


Washington's hospitals, here
tofore considered legally exempt
from damage suits arising from
negligence, can be successfully
sued, the United States Court of
Appeals ruled today in an opin-
ion that marks the first decision
on this question by the appellate
tribunal.
The important decision was
handed down in the case of Miss
Susan M. Hughes versus the presi-
dent and directors of Georgetown
College. operators of Georgetown
Hospital.
Justice James M. Proctor in District
Court had held that Miss Hughes
could properly sue the hospital for
damages which she allegedly re-
ceived while on duty as special
nurse there. Miss Hughes was
awarded $4,000 by a jury for in
juries which she said she received
when student nurse at the hos
pital carelessly flung open door
in the hallway while she was pass
ing. The swinging door knocked
Miss Hughes down.
Not Regular Employe.
Miss Hughes was nurse specially
called on duty to treat an individual
patient at the hospital and was not
a regular employe of the institu-
ton. She was injured october 29,
1894.
She was represented by Attorney
Emmett Leo Sheehan.
Georgetown Hospital appealed
from the District court ruling. claim
ing immunity from damage suits in
line with the old English common
law doctrine that charitable insti-
tutions are not usually answerable
in court for damages.
The case was heard by all six
appeals court justices, with Associate
Justice Wiley Rutledge writing the
23-page opinion.
Tradition Giving Way.
In its summary, the court said:
The rule of immunity for chari-
table institutions is out of step
with the general trend of legislative
and judicial policy in distributing
losses incurred by individuals
through the operation Of an enter
prise among all who benefit by 1t
rather than in leaving them wholly
to be borne by those who sustain
them.
The rule OF immunity itself has
given away gradually but steadily
through widening, though not too
we'll or consistently reasoned modi-
fications 1t Is disintegrating. Each
modification has the justification
that it is a step in results. If not in
reason. from the original error to
eventual correction.
In taking this view we are not
unmindful that charitable institu-
tions perform a high service In the
community. In days when the state
was less mindful of individual need
they gave helping hand not other
wise held out to large numbers of
people. They still do so. They
recently have faced. and still face,
grave problems. Purse strings no
longer are loose, as they we're before
world wars and worldwide depres-
sions.
But individuals and business in
stitutions face similar uncertainties.
1t does not recompense injured per-
sons that the loss is inflicted by
charitable institutions, nor should
they alone bear it because all to-
gether face hard future.
For reasons already stated we do
not believe the survival of charities
will turn on whether or not they
must answer for their wrongs to
persons they are formed to help.
There may be some added expense
of operation. 1t may be no more
than the cost of litigating these
claims over and over. for the issue
(of immunity will not down.
Insurance must be carried to
guard against liability to strangers.
Adding beneficiaries cannot greatly
increase Ine TlSk OF IHe pIciuluIu
This slight additional expense cam
not have the consequences so fire.
quently feared in judicial circles, but
so little realized in experience.
Proper management will provide the
protection.
ITO offset the expense will be the
gains of eliminating another area
of what has been called protected
negligence" and the anomaly that
the institutional doer of good asks
exemption from responsibility for its
wrong, though all others must pay.
The incorporated charity should
respond as do private individuals,
business corporations and others
when it does good in the wrong way"
One of the immediate results of
today's decision if 1t Is not upset
by the Supreme Court or subsequent
legislation is foreseen as being in
creased insurance rates for Wash
ington hospitals to anticipate dam
age suits.