Presenting Evidence and Questioning Witnesses

Presenting Evidence and Questioning Witnesses

1- Mrs. Jane Bekos, Misericordia's medical staff coordinator (appointed April 1973), testifying from the hospital records, noted that Salinsky's appointment to the medical staff was by the then hospital administrator, David A. Scott, Sr., on June 22, 1973.

2- Mrs. Bekos, testified that although her hospital administrative duties entailed obtaining all the information available, she failed to contact any of the references in Salinsky's case. In her testimony she attempted to justify her failure to investigate Salinsky's application because she believed she had been a member of the medical staff prior to her employment in April 1973,

3-. At trial, the only member of Misericordia's medical staff executive committee * 715 to testify was Dr. Louis Maxey who stated that he did not recall ever being at any meeting where Salinsky's application was even considered.

4. Further, Walter Harden, Family Hospital's administrator, testified that no one from Misericordia, much less an executive committee member, contacted him in regard to Salinsky's statement in his application that he had orthopedic privileges at that institution. In fact, Mercy grants this point, stating "In this particular case, the defendant-appellant-petitioner hospital has admitted all along he did not check Dr. Salinsky's credentials …"

. The administrators of both Northwest General Hospital and New Berlin Memorial Hospital testified that their records indicated Dr. Salinsky had never been associated with their hospitals. Also, Walter Harden, the administrator of Family Hospital where Dr. Salinsky had medical staff privileges from 1954 to 1973, testified that Salinsky was neither board certified, nor board eligible in the field of orthopedic surgery. This testimony contradicts the following language contained in the preceding sentences Salinsky's signature on his Mercy application:

Furthermore, I believe that I am qualified to perform all procedures for which I, and I am not entitled to any procedures for which I am not certified. have requested privileges. "

With respect to the latter, Dr. Sam Neeseman, a clinical professor of orthopedic surgery at the Medical College of Wisconsin and a board certified orthopedic surgeon with surgical privileges at numerous Milwaukee area hospitals testified that he had conversed with a number of orthopedic surgeons in the Milwaukee area to Dr. Salinsky's credentials and stated that the vast majority of Dr. Salinsky's peers in the Milwaukee metropolitan area agreed that Salinsky was not a competent orthopedic surgeon.

6- Drs Salinsky and Maxey testified for the defense. Salinsky contradicted the testimony of the administrators of Northwest General Hospital and New Berlin Memorial Hospital, stating that he had consultant privileges with those hospitals. He has also testified that he did not approve his own appointment to Misericordia's medical staff and attempted to explain his signature in the approval section of his application, stating his signature appeared there "Because I was asked to sign the papers, and I signed the papers . Salinsky further stated that his appointment to Misericordia's medical staff was approved because other members of the staff recommended him.

7- Dr. Maxey, as noted above, was the only member of Misericordia's medical staff executive committee in 1973 to testify at the trial. Besides testifying that he could not recall having ever participated in the review of Salinsky's application, Maxey stated that he was familiar with Salinsky's ability as an orthopedic surgeon prior to the time Salinsky applied for staff privileges at Misericordia.

8- Maxey testified that the fact that other hospitals had denied, suspended, limited or revoked Salinsky's privileges would not influence his belief in this regard, stating:

"… if I personally had contacted a hospital and the contact point had been given to me by Dr. Salinsky, or any doctor, * 721 particularly a surgeon, I would have a great deal of reservations to what the source of the criticism was in view of the medical hospital politics that exists today, and so it would not have swayed my opinion relative to his competency at all. "

In Ferguson, supra, the plaintiff was admitted to the hospital under the care of Dr. Gonyaw, an osteopathic neurosurgeon. The plaintiff was suffering from a back injury at the time of admission to the hospital and his injury was apparently aggravated by the treatment received in the hospital at the hand of Gonyaw, as he alleged that Gonyaw failed to use the standard requirement of care in treating the same He alleged that the hospital was negligent in granting staff privileges to Dr. Gonyaw claiming that a reasonable and prudent hospital would have determined that Gonyaw had inadequate training to be able to practice neurosurgery in his facilities. I have established that the hospital had not verified the facts on Dr. Gonyaw's application for staff privileges and in fact they did not even follow normal procedures, ie, [t] here were no letters in the file cross-checking his references or his past associations. Neither were there notices of telephone calls to his references or past associates as the administrator testified there * 732 should have been if such telephone calls had been made. "The Michigan Court of Appeals held that the hospital was negligent in this regard stating (p.667):

"One of the hospital's primary functions is to screen its staff of physicians to 'insure' that only competent physicians are allowed to practice in the hospital.

10-. Dr. Neeseman stated that he had personally reviewed some of Salinsky's cases and found that they "were not the work of a competent orthopedic surgeon."

11- specialty. Dr. Sam Neeseman stated that a hospital's credentials committee, with knowledge of such events would not, in the exercise of ordinary care, have approved the applicant's request for orthopedic privileges.

Presenting Evidence and Questioning Witnesses

1- Mrs. Jane Bekos, Misericordia's medical staff coordinator (appointed April of 1973), testifying from the hospital records, noted that Salinsky's appointment to the medical staff was recommended by the then hospital administrator, David A. Scott, Sr., on June 22, 1973.

2- Mrs. Bekos, testified that although her hospital administrative duties entailed obtaining all the information available regarding an applicant from the hospitals and doctors referred to in the application for medical staff privileges, she failed to contact any of the references in Salinsky's case. In her testimony she attempted to justify her failure to investigate Salinsky's application because she believed he had been a member of the medical staff prior to her employment in April of 1973,[

3- . At trial, the only member of Misericordia's medical staff executive committee *715 to testify was Dr. Louis Maxey who stated that he did not recall ever being at any meeting where Salinsky's application was even considered.

4- Further, Walter Harden, Family Hospital's administrator, testified that no one from Misericordia, much less an executive committee member, contacted him in regard to Salinsky's statement in his application that he had orthopedic privileges at that institution. In fact, Misericordia concedes this point, stating "In this particular case, the defendant-appellant-petitioner hospital has admitted all along it did not check Dr. Salinsky's credentials. . . ."

. The administrators of both Northwest General Hospital and New Berlin Memorial Hospital testified that their records indicated Dr. Salinsky had never been associated with their hospitals. Also, Walter Harden, the administrator of Family Hospital where Dr. Salinsky had medical staff privileges from 1954 to 1973, testified that Salinsky was neither board certified, nor board eligible in the field of orthopedic surgery. This testimony contradicts the following language contained in the sentences preceding Salinsky's signature on his Misericordia application:

"I have not requested privileges for any procedures for which I am not certified. Furthermore, I realize that certification by a board does not necessarily qualify me to perform certain procedures. However, I believe that I am qualified to perform all procedures for which I haverequested privileges."

5- With respect to the latter, Dr. Sam Neeseman, a clinical professor of orthopedic surgery at the Medical College of Wisconsin and a board certified orthopedic surgeon with surgical privileges at numerous Milwaukee area hospitals testified that he had conversed with a number of orthopedic surgeons in the Milwaukee area regarding Dr. Salinsky's credentials and stated that the vast majority of Dr. Salinsky's peers in the metropolitan Milwaukee area agreed that Salinsky was not a competent orthopedic surgeon.

6- Drs. Salinsky and Maxey testified for the defense. Salinsky contradicted the testimony of the administrators of Northwest General Hospital and New Berlin Memorial Hospital, stating that he had consultant privileges with those hospitals. He also testified that he did not approve his own appointment to Misericordia's medical staff and attempted to explain away his signature in the approval section of his application, stating his signature appeared there "Because I was asked to sign the papers, and I signed the papers. . . ." Salinsky further stated that his appointment to Misericordia's medical staff was approved because other members of the staff recommended him.

7- Dr. Maxey, as noted above, was the only member of Misericordia's medical staff executive committee in 1973 to testify at the trial. Besides testifying that he could not recall ever having participated in the review of Salinsky's application, Maxey stated that he was familiar with Salinsky's ability as an orthopedic surgeon prior to the time Salinsky applied for staff privileges at Misericordia.

8- Maxey testified that the fact that other hospitals had denied, suspended, limited or revoked Salinsky's privileges would not influence his belief in this regard, stating:

". . . if I personally had contacted a hospital and the contact point such as an administrator had given me a negative opinion relative to Dr. Salinsky, or any doctor, *721 particularly a surgeon, I would have a great deal of reservations as to what the source of the criticism was in view of the medical hospital politics that exist today, and so it would not have swayed my opinion relative to his competency at all."

9-  In Ferguson, supra, the plaintiff was admitted to the defendant hospital under the care of Dr. Gonyaw, an osteopathic neurosurgeon. The plaintiff was suffering from a back injury at the time of admission to the hospital and his injury was apparently aggravated by the treatment received in the hospital at the hand of Gonyaw, as he alleged that Gonyaw failed to use the requisite standard of care in treating the same. He alleged that the hospital was negligent in granting staff privileges to Dr. Gonyaw claiming that a reasonable and prudent hospital would have determined that Gonyaw had inadequate training to be allowed to practice neurosurgery in its facilities. He established that the hospital had not verified the facts on Dr. Gonyaw's application for staff privileges and in fact they did not even follow normal procedures, i.e., "[t]here were no letters in the file cross-checking his references or his past associations. Neither were there notations of telephone calls to his references or past associates as the administrator testified there *732 should have been if such telephone calls had been made." Id. 64 Mich. App. at 697, 236 N.W.2d at 550. The Michigan Court of Appeals held that the hospital was negligent in this regard stating (p. 697):

"One of the hospital's primary functions is to screen its staff of physicians to `insure' that only competent physicians are allowed to practice in the hospital.

10- . Dr. Neeseman stated that he had personally reviewed some of Salinsky's cases and found that they "were not the work of a competent orthopedic surgeon."

11- specialty. Dr. Sam Neeseman stated that a hospital's credentials committee, with knowledge of such events would not, in the exercise of ordinary care, have approved the applicant's request for orthopedic privileges.

find the cost of your paper