Opinion ID: 1900990
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Admissibility of Nurses' Journal Article

Text: I disagree with the majority's conclusion that the nurses' journal article was irrelevant and consequently inadmissible. To be relevant, evidence must have a logical tendency to prove or disprove a fact which is of consequence to the outcome of the action. C. Ehrhardt, Florida Evidence 401.1 at 83 (2d ed. 1984). In establishing a medical standard of care, I believe it is relevant to present materials used in educational programs conducted for personnel charged with the patient's care. The appellant hospital admittedly utilized the article in issue in a nurses' training program. The distribution of the article was clearly intended to educate the nurses who were employed in this hospital's intensive care facility with respect to the need for strict monitoring of ventilator patients. The appellants, in their brief, concede that the exhibit was directed to a critical issue  the extreme dependence of a respirator patient on hospital personnel  but object to its admission on the grounds that the article is sensational and portrays respirator patients as being panic-stricken, making the jury more likely to award a huge amount of damages. In my view, this article, because of its use as a training tool, is probative of a standard of care required of intensive care personnel in the appellant hospital, and its probative value outweighed any prejudicial effect in this trial. I find no merit in appellants' assertion that the article should have been excluded as hearsay. This was a material out-of-court writing offered to show information that the appellant hospital believed relevant to the education of nurses charged with monitoring respirator patients. It was clearly designed to affect the conduct of this hospital's intensive care unit nurses. My view is consistent with E. Cleary, McCormick on Evidence, § 249 (3d ed. 1984), which states: When it is proved that D made a statement to X, with the purpose of showing the probable state of mind thereby induced in X, such as being put on notice or having knowledge, or motive, or to show the information which X had as bearing on the reasonableness ... of the subsequent conduct of X .. . the evidence is not subject to attack as hearsay. (emphasis added; footnotes omitted). For these reasons, I would find the article was properly admitted and would proceed to address the reasonableness of the verdict for pain and suffering and the loss of ability to lead a normal life.