Court Opinion

ID: 9479875
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-05 07:31:21.305096+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:47:20.203351
License: Public Domain

JOHN R. BROWN, Senior Circuit Judge,
concurring.
I concur without qualification. With respect to the testimony of Ronald’s mother about what happened, I would add to Judge Bownes' powerful statements two things.
The first is that F.R.Civ.P. 61 requires the trial (and this Court) to “disregard any error or defect ... which does not affect the substantial rights of the parties.” Moreover, this is not only the congressional direction from the rule approval process. 28 U.S.C. §§ 2072 and 2074. Rather, it is the direct command of Congress that on the hearing of any appeal “... the court shall give judgment ... without regard to errors or defects which do not affect the *422substantial rights of the parties.” 28 U.S.C. § 2111.
The issue of timeliness of nurses’ responses to Ronald’s was, to be sure, nominally in the case. But the only real controversy was whether a patient with Ronald’s history should have been moderately restrained. What Ronald’s mother said Ronald said did not touch that problem. The jury could, and probably did, ignore the inconsequential question whether the nurses on duty jumped fast enough.