Court Opinion

ID: 9545153
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 17:07:18.590736+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:14:11.660012
License: Public Domain

McALLISTER, J.,
concurring.
The majority holds that there was no showing that the surgeon had sufficient opportunity to exercise direct supervision and control over the operation of the machine which caused plaintiff’s injury. I agree with that holding, and concur in the majority opinion except for the paragraph dealing with the hospital’s superior opportunity to prevent injuries caused by negligent maintenance and operation of equipment. There was no evidence on that question, and the majority’s statements are based on factual assumptions which I doubt are valid. In any event, these statements are unnecessary and unrelated to the holding and its rationale. Their only possible effect is future confusion and uncertainty as to the basis for our decision in this case.