Supreme Court of Ohio. WERLING, Admx., Appellant v. SANDY et al.,Appellees. Group One: 李嘉妍 吴晨阳

案件情况 目录页 2 3 1 4 Contents Page Facts Procedure History Plantiff Assertion Defendent Argument 2 3 目录页 1 4 Contents Page 案件情况

Issues Rules Reasoning Conclusion 6 7 目录页 5 8 Contents Page 案件分析

Facts 图绘制 案件情况 案件分析 01 Appellant became pregnant during the summer months of 1980. She soon after consulted Drs. Sandy and Thompson for the necessary obstetrical care. The physicians initially determined that appellant was an increased labor risk due to her obesity. While her medical history also included nephritis and hypertension, appellant was examined by the physicians on fifteen occasions during her pregnancy and did not have any serious complications associated therewith。

Facts 图绘制 案件情况 案件分析 02 Appellant admitted herself to the hospital on the evening of April 30, 1981. She was under the supervision of Dr. Thompson by the early morning hours of the next day. A fetal monitor was attached to her body in order to evaluate the heartbeat of the fetus. All parties hereto agree that the nine-to-ten-month-old fetus was alive and viable FN1 just prior to delivery.

Facts 图绘制 案件情况 案件分析 03 However, prior to the decedent's birth, Dr. Thompson left the hospital to deliver another baby. Appellant remained in the labor room and her condition was monitored by the hospital's nursing staff. Without prior warning, the fetal monitor indicated that the baby's heart was no longer functioning. The only surgeon in the hospital was unavailable as he was in surgery with another patient. Upon completion of the operation, the *46 surgeon examined appellant and ordered her prepped for surgery. Monica Jane was subsequently delivered stillborn by the surgeon.

Facts 图形 Defendent: Plaintiff: Lucinda T. Werling 案件情况 图形 案件分析 工作不足 明年计划 Defendent: Plaintiff: Lucinda T. Werling Sandy and Thompson, the Lima Group Family Physicians, Defendant: Lima memorial hospital. Defendent: People who had undertaken to provide examination, care, supervision and treatment of her condition of pregnancy and the delivery of her child .

Proedure History 图 案件情况 案件分析 完成情况 工作不足 明年计划 The trial court granted appellees' motions to dismiss by ruling that a cause of action does not exist for the alleged wrongful death of a viable fetus Plaintiff's assignments of error are not well taken and the judgment of the trial court must be affirmed the plaintiff maintain a action of wrongful death Plaintiff submitted a appeal and pointed out two assignments of error Defendants raised a motion to dismiss the plaintiff’s complaint

plaintiff assertion 图形 绘制 案件情况 工作概述 案件分析 完成情况 工作不足 明年计划 She alleges that her child died on May 1, 1981, having been stillborn on that date, that said child was a viable fetus immediately prior to, and at the time of, its death; that defendants, their agents, servants, and employees negligently performed or failed to follow or perform the customary and usual examinations, care, supervision, treatment or procedures and that as a result of defendants' negligence, the child was stillborn, for which plaintiff seeks damages.

plaintiff assertion errors one errors two 图形 图形 案件情况 图形 工作概述 图形 案件分析 完成情况 工作不足 明年计划 Plaintiff appeals setting forth two assignments of error ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR NUMBER ONE: The Trial Court erred in determining that no cause of action exists for the wrongful death of a viable unborn fetus. errors one ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR NUMBER TWO: The Trial Court erred in granting the Motion to Dismiss on the basis that the Complaint failed to state a claim for which relief could be granted.” errors two

Defendent Arguements 制 案件情况 图形 工作概述 完成情况 案件分析 工作不足 明年计划 All defendants moved to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted.

Rules 图形 图形 案件情况 工作概述 案件分析 完成情况 工作不足 明年计划 When the death of a person is caused by wrongful act, neglect, or default which would have entitled the party injured to maintain an action and recover damages if death had not ensued, the person who would have been liable if death had not ensued, or the administrator or executor of the estate of such person, as such administrator or executor, shall be liable to an action for damages. R.C. 2125.01 in General Assembly Section 16, Article I of the Ohio Constitution All courts shall be open, and every person, for an injury done him in his land, goods, person, or reputation, shall have remedy by due course of law, and shall have justice administered without denial or delay. Section 10509-166 et seq.General Code The administrator of the estate of a child who, while viable, suffered a prenatal injury through the alleged negligent act of another and who died approximately three months after its birth as a result of such injury has a cause of action against such other for damages for the benefit of the parents of such infant.

Issues 图 案件情况 工作概述 图形 案件分析 完成情况 工作不足 明年计划 Whether the statutory beneficiaries of an unborn fetus are entitled to damages for the wrongful death of the fetus where both the alleged negligently inflicted injury and death of the child occurred before birth? 01 02 Whether an unborn fetus which dies en ventre sa mere FN3 may be considered a “person” for the purposes of the statute under consideration?

reasoning 图形 案件情况 工作概述 案件分析 完成情况 工作不足 明年计划 Suppose, for example, viable unborn twins suffered simultaneously the same prenatal injury of which one died before and the other after birth. Shall there be a cause of action for the death of one and not for that of the other? Surely logic requires recognition of causes of action for the deaths of both, or for neither It will be very anonalous that if one who by criminal act caused the death of vaible unborn fetus would not be held criminally responsible for that act ,while one who through neglect or default caused the death of a viable unborn fetus would be civilly responsible therefore. If death had not ensued, the child in our present case would have been entitled to maintain an action. We are unable to reconcile the two propositions, that if the death occurred after birth there is a cause of action, but that if it occurred before birth there is none. Or, to adapt the words of the Supreme Court just quoted, it would be absurd if recovery could be had for such injuries, unless those injuries were so severe as to cause death before birth

Conclusion 案件情况 工作概述 案件分析 完成情况 工作不足 明年计划 The court concluded that an action does not lie in Ohio for the wrongful death of a viable unborn fetus which is subsequently stillborn, and that plaintiff can prove no set of facts entitling her to recovery.And plaintiff's assignments of error are not well taken and the judgment of the trial court must be affirmed..

THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION 模板来自于 http://docer.wps.cn 谢谢 THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION 16