Opinion ID: 1613536
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Whether the Physician Received Compensation, Either Directly or Indirectly, from the Patient for Professional Services Rendered

Text: ¶ 25. There is no evidence in the record that Dr. Madakasira was ever compensated for his consultation with Dr. Ali. Dr. Madakasira argues his only compensation for fulfilling his role as a supervisor in the psychiatry department was the salary that he was paid pursuant to his contract with UMMC. Since even Bennett admits that he was not Jake's physician, Dr. Madakasira argues there is no issue as to whether he received compensation from Jake. ¶ 26. With no single factor being dispositive, we find that, based on the record before the court and the forgoing analysis, the majority of the factors do not weigh in favor of finding that Dr. Madakasira was acting as an employee of UMMC during the relevant time period. Sullivan, 768 So.2d at 886 n. 3. Contested status issues invariably require discovery.... While summary judgment may be appropriate where the status issue has been fully fleshed out and there are no material issues of fact, it cannot be said that the status issue in this case has been fully fleshed out. Owens v. Thomae, 759 So.2d 1117, 1122 (Miss.1999). Summary judgment was inappropriate.